< 


I 


1 

■ 

I 

1 

- 

1 

BX  5883 

.W44  1821              1 

Weller, 

George, 

1790-1841. 

A  reply 

to  the 

Review  of  Dr. 

Wyatt's  sermon 

and  Mr. 

REPLY 


TO 

Of  Dr.   Wyatfs  Sermon  and  Mr.  Sparks^s  Letters  | 

ON  THE 

PROTESTANT  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH, 

WHICH    ORIGINALLY    APPEAREB 

IN  THE  CHRISTIAN   DISCIPLE   AT  BOSTON, 

AXD    SUBSEQUENTLY, 

IN  A  SEPARATE  FORMAT  BALTIMORE 

IN   WHICH 

IT  IS  ATTEMPTED  TO  VINDICATE  THE  CHURCH 

FROM  THE  CHARGES  OF  THAT  REVIEW. 


BY  A  PROTESTANT  EPISCOPALIAN- 


"  Founded  in  truth  ;  by  blood  of  martydom 
Cemented  ;  by  the  hands  of  wisdom  i-eared 
In  beauty  of  holiness ;  with  ordered  pomp, 
Decent  and  unreproved." 


BOSTON  : 

R.  p.  k  C.  WILLIAMS,  CORNHILL-SQUARE, 

(Between  58  &  59  Cornhill.) 

1821. 


TO  THE  READER.  , 

IT  is  proper  to  premise,  for  the  correction  of  an  erroneoufi 
opinion  which  we  know  has  been  industriously  circulated,  that  this 
controversy  did  not  begin  on  the  part  of  Episcopalians.  The  ser- 
mon of  Dr.  Wyatt,  to  which  Mr.  Sparks  grappled  himself  with  such 
eager  haste,  was  written,  as  we  understand,  for  the  ordinary 
duties  of  the  pulpit,  without  any  view  to  publication.  Its  delivery, 
as  we  dicover  from  the  author's  address  to  his  parishioners,  was 
occasioned  by  a  public  discourse  of  one  of  the  presbyterian  minis- 
ters of  Baltimore  to  a  congregation  collected  by  advertisements  in 
the  newspapers  of  that  city,  and  in  which  the  clergy  of  various  de- 
nomination,s  were  included  :  the  appointment,  at  that  time,  of 
ruling  eld,ers  led  the  minister  to  exhibit  his  views  of  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  ministry  and  of  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel.  "  Both  the 
opportunity  and  the  manner  were  deemed  unexceptionable,"  says 
Dr.  Wyatt.  About  the  same  time,  a  sermon,  intended  as  an  at- 
tack on  the  peculiar  principles  pf  the  Episcopal  church,  and  which 
had  been  recently  delivered  before  a  Presbyterian  synod  in  a 
neighbouring  part  of  Virginia,  was  publickly  advertised  and  offered 
for  sale  at  the  Bookstores  in  that  city.  About  this  time  too,  had 
occurred  the  ordination  of  Mr.  Sparks  ;  to  be  present  at  which  the 
clergy  of  that  city  were  invited  by  an  advertisement  in  the  newspapers.* 

*  "  The  ordination  of  Mr.  Jared  Sparks,  to  the  pastoral  charge 
of  the  first  Independent  Church  of  Baltimore,  according  to  the  an- 
cient and  established  usages  of  New-England,  will  take  place  to- 
morrow. The  gentlemen  who  have  been  invited,  together  with 
the  delegation  from  the  respective  churches  to  compose  the  or- 
daining council,  are,  &c.  &c.  Several  of  these  gentlemen  will 
assist  in  the  services  oi'  the  day.  The  Sermon  will  be  preached 
Ijy  the  Rev.  Mr.  Ctwmng.  The  services  will  be  commenced  at 
10,  o'clock  in  the  morning.  Seats  will  be  reserved  for  such  of  the 
clergj'  as  feel  disposed  to  attend,"  &c. 

Baltimore  JVewspaper.,  May  4^  181 9o 


Had  they  attended,  they  were  to  have  been  gratified  with  the 
sermon,  then  deUvered  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Channing  of  Boston,  since 
pubHshed,  and  controversial  in  the  highest  degree.  These  cir- 
cumstances known,  it  is  not  to  be  pretended,  even  for  a  moment, 
that  the  Episcopal  church,  has,  in  this  instance,  manifested  a  dis- 
position for  controversy.  On  the  other  hand,  the  publication  of 
Dr.  Wyatt's  sermon  was  eagerly  seized  on  as  a  pretext  for  an  at- 
tack on  Episcopalians,  and  lest  a  volume  should  not  be  sufficient, 
either  in  bulk  or  strength,  it  was  backed,  in  true  bitterness  of  spirit, 
by  the  Review  in  the  Christian  Disciple. 

We  have  not  taken  our  pen  with  the  view  of  protracting  this 
controversy.  Much  of  this  Review  was  deemed  very  objectiona- 
ble, and  calculated  to  give  very  false  ideas  of  the  church,  to  those 
who  know  very  little  concerning  it.  Better  fitted  for  general  cir- 
culation, it  would  probably  reach  places,  whither  Mr.  Sparks's 
volume  would  not  penetrate.  The  correction  of  the  misstate- 
ments was  easily  made,  and  it  was  therefore  thought  best  to  fur- 
nish some  corrective,  which,  partaking  of  the  ephemeral  character 
of  the  attack,  might  be  quickly  read,  and  pass  away  with  its  cause. 
As  our  object  is  not  controversy,  and  as  perhaps,  we  have  said 
enough  for  the  purpose  we  had  in  view,  we  shall  not  easilij  be  pre- 
yailed  on  to, give  the  subject  farther  notice  in  this  way. 


REPLY. 


X  HE  "  leaven  of  the  Pharisees,"  which  so  bitterly 
actuated  some  of  the  first  settlers  of  New-England, 
both  before  and  after  their  emigration,  has  not  ceased 
its  workings,  if  we  may  judge  from  this  review,  among 
those,  who,  almost  their  antipodes  in  principle,  yet 
claim  to  be  the  sons  of  the  Puritans. 

If  there  is  merit  in  an  actual  descent  from  the  fathers 
of  New-England,  we  have  claims,  which,  perhaps, 
would  not  suffer  in  comparison  with  those  of  the  Re- 
viewer; but  when  we  consider  that  they  were  men 
who  unhesitatingly  transacted  the  very  deeds  they  had 
so  loudly  exclaimed  against  in  others,  we  would  rather 
speak  of  their  sufferings  in  any  other  cause  than  that  of 
religion  ;  the  best  interests  of  which,  as  we  think,  they 
unnecessarily  opposed,  though,  as  we  would  charitably 
believe,  "  through  ignorance  they  did  it." 

We  are  not  well  informed  as  to  the  extent  of  the  in- 
jury done  to  Episcopacy  by  what  the  Reviewer  calls 
**  the  formidable  assault  of  Dr.  Mayhew  in  1763  ;"  but 
as  the  church  in  New- England,  or  at  least  in  Massa- 
chusetts, was  then  only  a  little  flock,  we  should  con- 
clude, from  its  condllion  during  our  memory,  that  the 
injury  was  not  very  great,  nor  the  assault  very  magnani- 


mous,  A  few  small  congregations  were  but  thinly 
scattered  over  the  state ;  their  ministers — when  they 
were  favored  with  them — were  chiefly  supported  by  the 
English  Society  for  propagating  the  gospel,  and  when, 
the  revolution,  and  not  Dr.  Mayhew's  formidable  as- 
sault, compelled  the  Society  to  withhold  the  scanty 
stipend  upon  which  these  men  depended,  it  was  a  very 
necessary  consequence  that  these  congregations  should, 
at  the  least,  languish,  if  not  wholly  expire.  The  alarm 
however,  does  not  seem  to  have  spread  through  New- 
England  so  thoroughly  as  the  Reviewer  would  have 
his  readers  to  suppose.  The  learned  and  able  Dr. 
Samuel  Johnson,  of  Stratford,  than  whom  no  mai^i  was 
better  qualified  to  judge,  believed  that  thechurclion  the 
whole  had  gained  ground  in  New-England  by  th^s  con- 
troversy.* Bishop  White  says,f  when  the  revolution, 
ary  war  began,  there  were  not  more  than  about  eighty 
parochial  clergymen  of  the  church  to  the  northward; 
and  eastward  of  Maryland,  ^'  and  yet  in  1792,  when  the 
shock  of  the  war  was  scarcely  spent,  the  number  was 
about  the  same ;  and  at  this  time  it  has  considerably 
more  than  doubled.'^  It  is  certainly  cause  of  gratitude, 
that  where  her  adversaries  are  the  chief,  our  Ziou  is 
enabled  to  look  up  and  shake  herself  from  the  dust. 

To  judge  from  the  manner  in  which  the  Reviewer 
speaks  of  the  present  increasing  prospects  of  the 
church,  we  should  suppose  that  the  apprehensions  of  her 
becoming  dangerous  had  bereft  him  of  his  patience  ; 
and  he  falls  into  some  mistatemeuts,  perhaps  froii^ 
mere  dread  of  encountering  the  whole  truth.     In  speak 

*  Life  of  Johnson  by  Dr.  Chandler,  p.  113. 
t  Hist.  Prot.  Ep.  Church,  in  U.  S.  A.  p.  1. 


ing  of  the  progress   of  "  Episcopal  peculiarities^^  in 
Maryland,  he  does  not  seem  to  be  aware  that  these  ^c- 
culiarities  were  once  establislied  by  law  in  that  state, 
and  that  through  the  want  of  clergymen  her  altars  were 
deserted,  and  Methodism  brought  in  to  supplant  her. 
But  a  better  day  has  risen,  as  we  trust,  on  the  church, 
both   in  that  state  and  Virginia.     In  Connecticut,  too, 
ftnp  would  suppose  that  he  believed   Episcopacy  had 
Started  in  her  full  dimensions,  from   the  late  political 
dissensions  in  that  state  on  the  subject  of  toleration. 
That   state   had  twenty-two  Episcopal  clergymen  in 
1792,  while  she  now  numbers  more  than  forty.     In 
Bishop  Hobart's   diocese  (New- York)   the  number  of 
parishes  is  one  hundred  and  twenty,  and  in  Bishop 
Kemp's  (Maryland)   sixty-one.      The   clergy  in  the 
former  are  about  seventy,  in  tlie  I^Uqi- forty -eight.    Some 
person  has  attempted  to  correct  the  Reviewer  by  a  note 
to  page  5,  of  the  Baltimore  edition.     Whoever  he  may 
have  been,  he  does  not  seem  to  have  known  that  there  is 
any  difference  between  ^^  preachers'^  and  parishes. 

For  the  information  of  our  readers  we  state,  that  the 
number  of  Episcopal  clergymen  throughout  tlie  United 
States,  is  now  about  three  hundred  and  twenty  ;  and 
that  they  are  to  be  found  settled,  and  that  conventions 
are  organized,  in  nearly  all  of  the  states. 

In  the  next  paragraph,  the  Reviewer,  with  some 
warmth,  and  a  glimmering  of  good  will,  for  exhibiting 
which  he  is  almost  angry  with  himself,  endeavors  to 
make  his  readers  believe  that  Dr.  Wyatt  is  the  author 
of,  what  is  to  himself,  a  very  obnoxious  opinion,  that  "to 
the  order  of  Bishops  alone  belongs  the  power  of  ordain- 
ing ministers  :  and  that  an  ordination  performed  by  the 


s 

hands  of  a  priest,  deacon  or  layman,  would  be  devoid 
of  any  degriee  of  validity  or  efficacy  in  conferring  spirit- 
ual office  and  power."  Was  it  from  apprehension 
that  some  of  bis  readers,  (whose  minds,  we  are  instruct- 
ed to  believe,  pursue  very  ardently  their  enquiries  for 
truth,)  would  examine  into  the  factsj  that  induced  him 
thus  to  garble  Dr.  Wyatt's  observation,  which  truly  is, 
' — "  thus  it  has  been  the  faith  uf  the  universal  church, 
without  exception  until  the  period  of  the  r^e^ormation, 
that  to  the  order  of  Bishops  alone  belongs,"  &c.  ?  In  a 
note  at  the  foot  of  the  same  page  of  the  sermon,  Dro 
W.  also  says,  ''  The  divine  institution  of  the  ministry, 
consisting  of  three  orders,  which  possess  distinct  pow- 
ers, is  maintained  by  the  great  bodij  of  the  christian 
world.  The  denominations  which  are  destitute  of  a 
succession  of  Bishops  from  the  Apostles,  occupy  a  com- 
paratively small  portion  of  Christendom.  TJiis  pre 
valence  of  Episcopacy  in  Christian  countries  ;  and  the 
favourable  opinionentertained  of  it  by  those  eminent  men, 
(Luther,  Calvin,  Melancthon,  Beza,  and  others,)  whose 
peculiar  circumstances  notwithstanding,  seems  to  have 
justified  a  departure  from  it,  are  adduced  to  show  that 
it  is  neither  a  singular,  nor  an  offensive  doctrine  which 
we  are  stating, — and  that  while  in  the  just  exercise  of 
their  civil  and  religious  liberty, — both  of  which  may 
God  preserve  ! — -some  large  and  devout  protestant  de- 
nominations reject  it,  we  claim  only  a  similar,  and  not 
an  indefensible  privilege  in  holding  and  advocating  it.*' 
Now  we  most  sincerely  doubt,  whether  there  is,  in  the 
Whole  of  the  Review,  a  single  sentence  written  in  so 
calm  and  charitable  a  manner,  as  these  few  sentences  5 
in  which  the  author  tells  his  parishioners,  that  the  doc= 


trine  of  their  church — the  doctrine  which  he  advocateg— 
was^  and  is,  received  and  acted  on  by  the  great  body 
of  the  Christian  world.  But  it  is  only  so  '^  according 
to  this  writer.''^  Is  the  Reviewer's  learning  ho  limited 
that  he  did  not  knov/  this  opinion  to  be  no  novelty  P  If 
lie  kneAV  otherwise,  it  would  have  been  but  honesty  in 
him  to  have  said  so. 

The  contrast  between  the  abilities  of  Dr.  Wyatt, 
and  Mr.  Sparks  is  so  strongly  stated,  that  if  we  take 
either  side,  without  deduction  for  truth,  we  can  scarce- 
ly avoid  the  conclusion  that  the  other  is  carricature. 
We  can  allow  much  for  personal  feeling,  but  in  a  ques- 
tion like  this,  we  shall  mistrust  a  mind  and  cause  which 
needs  such  bolstering  as  the  friendly  RevieAver  gives 
his  friend  Mr.  Sparks.  That  the  latter  has  respectable 
talents  we  do  not  doubt,  but  they  ivill  speak  for  them- 
selves. That  he  has  a  more  temperate  spirit  than  the 
Reviewer  we  doubt  as  little.  But  we  have  heard,  and 
seen,  too  much  of  the  talents  which  Unitarians  possess 
of  playing  into  each  other's  hands,  to  regard  such  ob- 
servations as  more  than  matters  of  course. 

Good  breeding  is  an  essential  requisite  to  a  sound 
education.  The  man  possessed  of  it  will  not  seek  to 
undervalue  his  opponent  by  little  arts, — by  contemptuous 
expressions, — ccrtairdy  not  by  those,  of  which  the  just 
application  can  be  questioned  by  men  of  not  less  erudi- 
tion than  himself.  Still  greater  will  be  his  caution,  who, 
to  a  sound  education,  adds  the  feelings  and  the  princi- 
ples of  a  Christian.  He  will  sustain  himself  by  the 
merit  of  his  cause — he  cannot  stoop  to  detraction.  The 
Reviewer  gives  such  an  opinion  as  he  pleases  upon 
Br.  Wyatt's  style,  (and  we  suppose  we  may  reasonably 
2 


10 

say,  is  somewhat  unjust  in  his  censures,)  while  he  fui*- 
nishes  to  liis  readers,  nine  in  ten  of  which,  he  well  knew, 
Would  never  see  Dr.  Wyatt's  sermon,  no  opportunity 
whatever  to  judge  for  themselves.  Is  this  the  course  of 
a  well-educated  and  candid  mind  ?  Nay,  "  an  enemy 
hath  done  this.'^ 

We  fear  that  these  engrossers  of  "  all  the  talents'^  as 
their  light  increases,  will  persuade  themselves  that  all 
true  learning,  as  well  as  "•'  uncorrupt  Christianity/^ 
is  confined  to  "  a  small  spot  in  Massachusetts.^^  To 
judge  from  the  confident  tone  and  manner  of  their  publi- 
cations against  the  church,  we  siiould  suppose  them 
very  near  that  extremity  now.  We /ear  it,  not  because 
we  assume  all  their  pretensions  as  facts,  but  because 
such  men  will  meddle  on  all  subjects,  whether  they 
understand  them,  or  not,  and  like  Goldsmith's  school 
master, 

"  Tho'  vanquished  they  can  argue  still." 
*^*  Seest  thou  a  man  wise  in  his  own  conceit  ?  There  is 
more  hope  of  a  fool  than  of  him." 

^^  Mr.  Sparks  in  his  first  letter,"  says  the  Reviewer, 
"  controverts  the  assumption,  that  the  Episcopal  is  the 
only  true  church,  that  its  ministry  originated  with  the 
Apostles,  and  has  descended  down  to  the  present  time, 
through  an  unbroken,  and  divinely  protected  succession  ; 
and  that  ordinations  performed  by  any  other  person  than 
Bishops  are  devoid  of  every  degree  of  efficacy  in  con- 
ferring spiritual  office  and  power." 

<^This  is  a  controversy,"  says  Ur.  Bowden,  ^^  which 
must  every  now  and  then  berevived  ;  and  our  opponents, 
not  being  deficient  in  sagacity,  see  very  clearly,  that  it 
will  not  do  to  take  notice  of  the  several  triumphant  an- 


11 

swei's  that  have  been  given  at  different  times  to  their 
hypothesis."     This  is  very  plainly  the  case,  in  the  in- 
stance before  us.     No  notice  is  taken  of  the  many  very 
able  works  which  the  clergy,  and  others,  of  the  English 
church  have  written  in  her  defence.     Sir  Peter  King^s 
work  against  the  above  position  could  be  quoted  with  ap- 
probation, and  not  a  syllable  be  dropped  on  the  fact  so 
often,  and  so  confidently  asserted,  and  never  yet  denied^ 
that  he  was  made  a  convert  to  this  very  position  by  the 
reply   of    the  Rev.   Mi\    Slater,  to   his  own  book.* 
Nothing  is  said  of  the  very  able  work  of  Dr.  Bowden, 
of  our  own  country,  which  certainly  has  done  much  to 
create,  and  strengthen  that  attachment  to  Episcopal  pe- 
culiarities, which  is  spreading  throughout  our  country. 
To  notice  these  defences, — to  admit  that  they  have  done 
any  thing  to  advance  theinterests  of  Episcopacy — would 
be  to  direct  inquiry  into  the  wrong  path  ;  which  might 
result  like  some  recent,  and  more  restricted,  examina^ 
tions,  disagreeable  to  the  Reviewer  and  his  party. 

*^Mr.  Sparks  appeals  in  the  first  place,  to  scripture 
evidence,"  and  concludes  with  a  statement  of  eight 
positions,  all  of  which   are  resolvable  into  ttco — that 

*  "  By  some  inadvertency,'''  says  the  Reviewer,  "  the  inquiry 
into  the  Constitution  of  the  primitive  church  is  ascribed  in  Mr. 
Sparks's  work  to  Archbishop  King.''''  We  suppose  Mr.  S's  notes  of 
college  lectures  may  have  become  illegible  at  this  place  ;  and  that 
he  had  not  seen  the  book.  It  was  a  good  story,  however,  for  the 
purpose.  An  Archbishop  opposing  Episcopacy  !  Who  afterward 
could  defend  it  ?  Sir  Peter  was  afterward  Lord  Chancellor  of 
England,  and  preferred  Mr.  Slatr  r  in  the  church.  It  would  cer- 
tainly be  well  for  those  inclined  to  adopt  Sir  Peter's  opinion,  to 
read  Mr.  Slater's  book,  entitled,  '■-  An  Original  Draught  of  the  prim- 
itive Church,'"'  before  they  consider  him  conclusive. 


12 

there  is  no  evidence  in  the  scriptures  of  three  orders 
in  the  ministry,  and  that  no  means  are  indicated  in  them 
by  which  the  ministry  might  be  perpetuated.  The  in- 
ference from  these  positions  would  be  a  fair  one,  that 
the  church  of  Christ  has  long  since  ceased  from  the 
earth  ;  while  the  Reviewer,  perhaps,  w^ould  wish  us  to 
deduce  the  consequence,  that  all  men  are  left  at  liberty 
to  form  churches  as  they  please.  The  Episcopal 
church,  for  many,  and  obvious  reasons,  rejects  both 
these  positions.  It  is  a  prevailing  principle  among  her 
well-educated,  and  well-informed  members,  that  her 
ministry  is  of  divine  institution.  This  term  may 
need  some  explanation.  We  give  it  in  the  language  of 
Dr.  Bowden.  ^'^  A  thing  may  be  said  to  be  divinely  in- 
stituted in  three  senses.  1.  As  God  positively  ordains 
it  by  his  own  express  command,  or  by  the  express 
command  of  his  son  Jesus  Christ.  In  this  sense,  I  do 
not  take  Episcopacy  to  be  of  divine  institution.  Nor  in 
this  sense  is  the  christian  sabbath,  or  infant  baptism,  or 
the  canon  of  scripture,  entitled  to  the  sanction  of  divine 
institution.  2.  A  thing  may  be  said  to  be  of  divine  in- 
stitution when  it  is  delivered  by  men  divinely  inspired ; 
^  are  all  those  precepts  and  ordinances,  delivered  by 
*be  apostles  and  prophets  by  divine  inspiration.  Every 
thing  of  this  kind  must  be  deemed  to  be  of  divine  in- 
stitution, because  God  by  his  Holy  Spirit  has  com- 
manded it.  3.  Whatever  is  founded  upon  a  divine 
commission,  as  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  sacraments,  and  the  power  of  the  keys, 
is  of  divine  institution.  In  the  two  last  senses,  I  take 
Episcopacy  to  be  of  divine  institution.  For  if  the  Holy 
Spirit  inspired  the  apostles  to  establish  Episcopacy  in 


the  cliurcli,  it  is  certainly  of  divine  institution,  although 
there  may  be  no  formal  and  express  precept  for  the  pur- 
pose. Or  if  the  apostles,  by  virtue  of  the  commission 
which  they  received  from  Jesus  Christ,  established 
Episcopacy,  it  must,  if  not  immediately,  yet  mediately, 
be  grounded  upon  divine  institution.  For  if  the  apos- 
tolic commission  was  founded  upon  divine  authority,  as 
it  certainly  was,  then  all  coramigsions  derived  from  that 
scource,and  within  thelimits  of  that  commission,  are  also 
mediately  formed  upon  divine  authority  ;  and  in  this 
sense,  at  the  least,  every  one  who  believes  Episcopacy 
not  to  be  a  mere  human  institution,  must  believe  it  to 
have  a  divine  sanction.  This  statement  is,  I  believe, 
agreeable  to  the  sentiments  of  the  best  writers  on  our 
side  of  the  question.'^ 

^^  It  is  evident  unto  all  men,  diligently  reading  Holy 
Scripture,  and  ancient  authors,"  says  the  preface  to 
the  ordinal  of  the  church,  "that,  from  the  apostles' times, 
there  have  been  these  officers  in  Christ's  church,  bishops, 
priests,  and  deacons."  The  fii>6t,  or  superior  order, 
were  intrusted  with  the  government  of  the  church, 
and  with  the  power  of  ordaining  or  admittbig  men  to 
the  inferior  orders.  The  second  order,  deriving  their 
power  through  the  hands  of  Bishops,  were  empowered 
to  preach  the  gospel,  and  administer  the  sacraments  of 
the  church.  The  third  order,  were  general  assistants 
in  the  service  of  the  church,  and  cliarged  with  tlie  care 
of  sick  and  poor  people.  These  tliree  orders  are 
known  in  scripture,  by  the  names,  first,  of  apostles, 
— second,  of  bisfiops  or  cluers, — and  third,  of  deacons. 
The  two  appelhidons  for  the  second  order  were  used  as 
synonimous,  till  the  deaib  of  the  apostles,  wJien  it  was 


14 

thought  best  in  the  church,  to  appropriate  that  name 
exclusively  to  those  who  had  "  seen  the  Lord/**  and 
had  received  their  commission  personally  from  him  ;  but 
the  office  being  retained,  the  name  of  bishop  was  ap- 
plied to  those  who  performed  its  duties,  as  a  substitute 
for  that  of  apostle.  The  otlier  offices  retained  the  name 
of  elder  or  presbyter,  and  deacon.  But,  ncunes  aside^ 
let  us  see  whether  there  are  not  in  the  scriptures  clear 
indications  of  the  existence  of  three  distinct  offices  or 
orders,  performing  different  duties. 

1.  There  was  an  order  of  men  governing  the  church 
and  ordaining  others  exclusively.  Unquestionably  the 
apostles  were  in  this  rank,  and  there  is  ample  evidence, 
in  the  scriptures,  that  they  associated  others  in  the  same 
work  with  themselves.  Barnabas,  Timothy,  Titus, 
Epaphroditus,  and  others  exercised  the  saviie  office- 
performed  the  same  duties.*  What  was  the  nature  of 
these  duties  may  be  seen  on  a  perusal  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  and  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  especially 
those  to  Timothy  and  Titus.  It  is  succinctly  stated  in 
the  last.  ^^  For  this  cause,"  says  St.  Paul,  "left  I  thee 
in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldst  set  in  order  the  things 
which  are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  in  every  city.  c.  i. 

*Actsxiv.  14 — Epistle  to  Timothy  and  Titu?,  passim.  Bishop 
Fell,  in  a  note  to  the  second  chapter  ofthe  epi?tle  to  the  Pliilippians, 
has  the  following-  passage  ;  "  Tertullian  in  prescrip.  saith,  that 
St.  Paul  instituted  an  Episcopal  see  at  Phihppi ;  Chrjsostom, 
Jerome,  Theodoret,  and  others.,  name  Epaphroditus  to  he  the  first 
Bishop.  And  the  epithets  given  him  by  the  apostle  do  seem  to 
confirm  this."  See  also  Skinner's  Vindication  of  primitive  truth 
and  order  in  reply  to  Dr.  Campbell's  Lectures  on  Eccles.  Hist.  pp. 
138 — 151,  and  Bowdenon  Episcopacy,  vol.  1.  p.  289. 


1$ 

V.  5.     We  read  of  Paul  and  Barnabas,  that,  '^  wlieii 
theij  had  ordained  them  elders  in  every  churchy  and  had 
prayed,   witli  fasting,    they    commended  them,''    &c» 
Acts   xiv.  23.     NoAV  the  scriptures,   though    they  in- 
form us  of  other  ministers,  (as  in  these  tvro  passages, 
of  elders,)  yet  make  no  mention   of  their  performing 
tliese  duties.     True,  there  is  a  passage  in  the  Epistle  to 
Timothy,  where  St.  Paul  is  considered  by  many  as  in- 
timating, that  presbyters  or  elders  were  associated  with 
himself  in   his  ordination.     ^'•'Neglect  not  the  gift  that 
is  in  thee,  which  was  given  thee  by  prophecy,  with  the 
laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  jrreshijterij.'^  1.  Tim.  iv. 
14.     Some  of  the  best  critics  arc,  however,  of  opinion 
that  tlie  term  here  used  applies  properly  to  the  college 
of  the  apostles,     8L  Ptiul,  however,  only  speaks  here 
of  a  concurrent  act :  such  as  is  practised  in  the  Episco- 
pal church,  while  in  the  second  Epistle,  i.  6.  he   speaks 
of  himself  as  the  actual  ordainer.- 

2.  There  was  an  order  of  ministers,  not  exercising 
the  duties  spoken  of  above,  but  having  other  duties  as 
signed  them,  which,  nevertheless,  were  common  to  both 
orders  :  namely,  preaching  and  administering  the  sacra- 
ments. Beside  which,  they  were,  from  time  to  time, 
charged  with  the  oversight  of  particular  congregations, 
and  were  in  this  respect  bishops  or  overseers  ;  which 
name,  we  have  admitted,  was  applied  to  them  during 
the  life-time  of  the  apostles.  Of  this  class  were  the 
'^  other  seventy''  sent  by  our  Lord, — as  also  the  elders 

*  Bishop  Fell,  in  loc. — Calvin's  Institutes,  L.  4.  c  3. — Assem- 
bly's Annotations  on  2  Tim.  i.  6. — Skinner's  Primitive  Truth,  p. 
140. — Slater's  Original  Draught,  p.  183. — Bowden  on  Episcopacy, 
vol.  1.  p.  305. — Bishop  White's  Lectures  on  the  Catechism,  p.  109. 


ordained  by  the  apostles,  asabovcmentioned, — those  or- 
dained by  Titus — those  sent  for  from  Ephesus  to  Mile- 
tus by  Paul, — those  addressed  by  Peter  in  his  first 
Epistle, — those  bishops  ordained  by  Timothy,  agree- 
ably to  the  directions  given  him  in  the  first  Epistle  of 
Paul, — and  tliose,  whom  Paul  associates  with  all  the 
saints f  and  the  deacons,  in  the  address  of  his  Epistle  to 
the  Philipians.*  "While  all  allow,  that  a  commission 
was  given  by  our  Lord  to  the  apostles,  to  gather,  and 
establish  his  church,  yet  no  one  pretends,  tliat  a  similar 
commission  was  given  to  the  seventy  ;  and  that  they 
were  not  equal  to  the  apostles,  is  fully  shown  by  the 
manner  in  which  the  place  of  Judas  was  supplied. 
(Acts,  c.  i.)  And  with  regard  to  those  elders  with 
whom  Timothy  and  Titus  were  connected,  it  is  ap- 
parent from  the  epistles  addressed  tp  these  last,  that 
they  were  vested  with  control  over  the  former.  They 
were  to  take  care  that  no  innovation  in  doctrine  be  ad- 
mitted,— to  punish  such  of  tJie  elders  and  others  as  dis- 
oheyed, — to  give  double  honor  to  such  as  laboured  dili- 
gently in  the  word  and  doctrine  ;  and  they  were  to  lay 
hands  suddenly  on  no  man,  but  to  use  great  caution  with 
regard  to  those  whom  they  admitted  to  the  ministry. 
3.  There  was  an  order  of  ministers  called  deacons, 
who  were  general  assistants  in  the  service  of  the  church. 
That  there  was  such  an  order  in  the  church  at  Jerusa- 
lem,—that  the  persons  on  whom  it  was  conferred,  were 

*  "  And  the  day  following  Paul  went  in  with  us  to  James  ;  [whoni 
all  Ecclesiastical  History  concurs  in  admitting  to  have  been  made 
Bishop  of  Jerusalem  by  the  apostles,]  and  all  the  elders  were  pre- 
sent," Actsxxi.  18.  "  The  apostles  and  ciders,  came  together,"' 
Acts  XV.  6. 


17 

DliOsen  by  the  people,  and  set  apart,  or  ordained,  by  the 
imposition  of  the  hands  of  the  apostles,  is  not  to  be  de- 
nied. But  it  is  said,  they  were  set  apart  onhj  for  the 
purpose  of  taking  charge  of  the  offerings  at  the  altar 
for  the  benefit  of  the  poor.  We  shall  not  deny  that 
this  was  the  object  for  which  the  order  was  first  in- 
stituted ;  but  were  they  limited  to  this  duty  by  the 
apostles  ?  AVe  have  farther  accounts  of  only  two  of 
them.  Stephen  is  spoken  of  as  an  able  preacher  and 
defender  of  the  gospel ;  and  we  are  informed  that  in 
consequence  of  the  persecution  which  arose  after 
his  death, — the  disciples  being  dispersed,— Philip 
went  down  to  Samaria,  and  preached  Christ  to  the 
people  of  that  city.  We  soon  find  him  baptizing. 
Now  preaching  and  baptizing  Avere  certainly  acts  of  the 
ministry  superior  to  the  mere  care  of  the  poor.  In  these 
transactionsj  we  find  he  was  sanctioned  by  the  apostles, 
as  Peter  and  John  were  sent  from  the  council  of  apostles 
at  Jerusalem,  not  to  rebaptize,  but  to  lay  their  hands  on 
those  whom  he  had  admitted  to  the  church  by  baptism. 
But  it  is  said,  that  this  PJiilip  was  an  Evangelist,  and 
that  this  accounts  for  these  transactions.  If  the  term 
Evangelist  denoted  an  office,  it  was  simply  in  the  same 
sense  as  Missionary  in  our  day  ;  one  who  travelled  to 
preach  the  gospel.  At  the  very  time  Philip  is  called  by 
this  name,  he  is  also  spoken  of  as  ona  of  the  seven. 
(Acts  xxi.  8.)  And  it  is  evident,  that  Peter  and  John 
were  his  superiors.  Besides,  the  charge  of  the  altar  of- 
ferings was  a  part  of  ministerial  duty  ;  the  apostles  exe- 
cuted it  till  the  election  of  the  seven.  St.  Paul,  in  his 
first  Epistle  to  Timothy,  speaks  twice  distinctly  of  the 

*^  office  of  a  deacon.^^     "  They  that  have  used  the  office 
3 


18 

of  a  deacon  well,  purchase  to  themselves  a  good  degree, 
and  great  boldness  in  the  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus.'" 
(1  Tim.  iii.  13).  ^'^  Hence  it  appears — says  the  learned 
Grotius — that  there  are  several  degrees,  or  orders  in  the 
ministry  of  the  church ;  and  that  the  deacons  have  their 
share  too  in  the  ministi^  of  the  word :  ^md  that  they 
were  not  instituted  only  for  the  care  of  the  poor.^'* 

In  connection  with  what  has  been  shown  above,  let 
the  reader  view  together  the  following  verses  from  the 
Epistle  to  the  Philippiaus.  "Paul  and  Timotheus. 
the  servants  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  all  the  saints  in  Christ 
Jesus  which  are  at  Philippi,  with  the  bishops  and  dea- 
cons.^' (v.  1.)  ^*  I  supposed  it  necessary  to  send  to  you 
Epaphroditus,my  brother,  and  companion  in  labour,  and 
fellow-soldier,  but  your  apostle.^^  (c.  ii.  v.  25. )t  Bishops, 
deacons,  and  saints  of  Philippi,  Epaphroditus  is  your 
apostle  !  To  use  the  Reviewer's  language,  "'  one  would 
think  this  enough  for  a  protestant !'' 

If  then  the  scripture  does  furnish  evidence  of  the  estab- 
lishment of  three  orders  in  the  ministry  by  the  apostles, 
acting  under  the  authority  of  our  Lord,  and  also  of  the 
means  by  which  that  ministry  might  be  perpetuated, 
through  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  apostles,  and  their 
successors,  and  by  directions  from  the  apostles   them- 

*  Hinc  apparel  diversas  esse  ministrorum  gradus,  et  diaconas 
habuisse  aliquam  partem  in  ministerio  verbi,  et  non  ad  solam  pau- 
perum  curam  institutes   fuisse.     Grotius. 

t  In  our  translation  of  the  Bible,  the  Greek  word  A^ae-roAos  is 
here  incorrectly  rendered  messenger^ — "  not  the  word  messenger 
but  the  word  apostle — says  Bishop  White — should  have  been  used  ; 
as  it  is  in  every  other  place  of  scripture  except  one."  Lectures 
on  the  Catechism,  p,  136.  See  also  Whitby,  in  loc.  and  note 
page  14, 


19 

selves,  tlicD  all  the  coucein  we  can  have  with  the  an- 
cient fathers  is  to  ascertain  whether  suitable  care  was 
taken  for  continuing  the  ministry  thus  established  ; — 
whether  being  divinely  instituted  it  was  also  divinely 
protected.  This  is  a  question  of  fact  only.  And 
surely  if  the  fathers  will  furnish  us  with  satisfactory 
testimony  an  this  point,  we  may  be  pardoned  a  little 
fondness  for  their  writings,  and  a  reasonable  desire  for 
their  preservation. 

''  We  have  cause  to  believe  that,  what  these  primi- 
tive professors  taught  concerning  the  doctrine,  the 
government,  and  the  discipline  of  the  church,  they  re- 
ceived,— as  Archbishop  Wake  observes, — from  the 
apostles,  the  apostles  from  Christ,  and  from  that  blessed 
spirit  who  directed  them,  both  in  what  they  taught  and 
in  what  they  ordained." 

The  earliest  father,  whose  writings  have  come  down 
to  us,  is  Clement  of  Rome.  He  lived  at  the  close  of 
the  first  century  ;  had  doubtless  conversed  with  several 
of  the  apostles,  and  left  one  Epistle  directed  to  the 
church  at  Corinth  ;  the  only  copy  of  which  known  to 
exist  was  found  written  in  the  same  volume  with  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament.^  In  this  Epistle  he  writes 
thus, — '^  It  will  behove  us  to  take  care  that,  looking  in- 
to the  depths,  we  do  all  things  in  order,  whatsoever  our 
Lord  hath  commanded  ns  to  do.  And  particularly, 
that  we  perform  our  ofterings  and  service  to  God  at  their 
appointed  seasons  :  for  these  he  has  commanded  to  be 
done,  not  rashly  and  disorderly,  but  at  certain  deter- 

*  Eusebius  says,  L.  3.  c.  II. — '•  This  Epistle  we  have  known  to 
be  publickly  road  in  many  churches,  bolh  of  old,  and  amongst  u? 

also." 


20 

minate  times,  and  hours.  And  therefore  he  has  ordain- 
ed, by  his  supreme  will  and  authority,  both  where  and 
hy  what  jJ^rsons,  they  are  to  be  performed  ;  that  so  all 
things  being  piously  done  unto  all  well-pleasing,  they 
may  be  acceptable  unto  him."*  Again:  ^'The  apostles 
have  preached  to  us  from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  Jesus 
Christ  from  God.  Christ  therefore  was  sent  from  God ; 
the  apostles  by  Jesus  Christ  ;  so  both  were  orderly 
sent,  according  to  the  will  of  God.  For  having  received 
their  command,  and  being  thoroughly  assured  by  the 
resurrection  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  and  convinced  by 
the  word  of  God,  with  the  full  assurance  of  tlie  Holy  Spirit^ 
they  went  abroad,  publishing  that  the  kingdom  of  God 
was  at  hand.  And  thus  preaching  through  countries 
and  cities,  they  appointed  the  first  fruits  of  their  conver- 
sions, to  be  BISHOPS  and  deacons  over  such  as  should 
afterwards  believe,  having  first  proved  them  by  the 
spirit."!  This  extract  proves,  that  a  ministry  was  estab- 
lished through  divine  influence  in  the  church,  and  that 
there  were  two  orders  resident  at  Corinth,  under  the 
control  of  the  apostles,| — some  of  whom  were  then 
living  ;  St.  John  and  Clement,  according  to  Dr.  Cave, 
both  dying  in  the  same  year.  In  less  than  fifty  years 
after  the  writing  of  this  Epistle,  Hegesippus,  travelling 
to  Home,  was  accompanied  by  Primus,  then  vested  with 
the  government  of  the  church  at  Corinth  as  apostolic 
bishop.  II 

Another  witness  to  the  fact  of  the  apostolic  establish- 
ment of  three  orders  in  the  ministry,  is  Ignatius,  who 

*  S.  Clem,  ad  Cor.  Epist.  i.  sec.  xl. 
t  Ibid.  sec. xlii.     Cotel.  pat  Apost.  vol.  i.  p.  170 — ITl. 
j  See    also    Slater's   Draught,    p.    213. — Skinner's     Primitive 
Truth,  p.  164.  jl  Quoted  by  Eusebius,  L.  4.  c.  22. 


21 

was  appoiuted  by  tlie  apostles  themselves,  apostolic- 
Bishop  of  Aiitioch  ill  Syria.  He  was  martyred  at 
Rome,  in  the  early  part  of  the  second  century.  Great 
efforts  have  been  made  to  destroy  the  credibility  of  his 
writings  ;  apparently,  because  he  is  the  first  of  the 
fathers  who  use*  the  names  of  bishop,  presbyter,  and 
deacon,  as  designating  three  distinct  offices.  His 
Epistles  are,  however,  quoted  by  Polycarp,  Bishop  of 
Smyrna,  by  Irenseus,  Bishop  of  Lyons,  by  Eusebius, 
the  father  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  and  by  Origen. 
Full  testimony  is  borne  to  them  by  Eusebius,  Chrysos- 
tom,  Jerome,  Theodoret,  and  Gelasius,  fathers  of  the 
fourth  century.  The  great  body  of  the  learned  of  all 
denominations, — says  Dr.  Bowden, — acknowledge  the 
shorter  epistles,  published  by  Archbishop  Usher,  and 
Vossius,  to  be  genuine,  and  entirely  /ree  from  those  cor- 
ruptions which  are  universally  admitted  to  belong  to 
the  larger  epistles.* 

Two  or  three  extracts,  only,  will  be  made  from  these 
epistles,  and  they  are  conclusive.     ^'  He  that  is  within 

*  Unitarians  also  object  to  these  Epistles  tliat  they  savour  too 
strong  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  There  are,  then,  two  co- 
gent reasons  why  they  should  endeavour  their  destruction.  But 
they  have  been  advocated  as  genuine  by  Abp.  Usher,  Abp.  Wake, 
Bp.  Bull,  Bp.  Pearson,  Dr.  Cave,  Cotelerius,  Vossius,  Grotius,  Du- 
pin,  Petavius,  Tillemont,  Leclerc,  Bochart,  Fabricius,  Dr.  Ham- 
mond, and  many  others.  See  Horsclcifs  Letters  to  Priestly^ p.  34. 
Even  Dr.  Lardnersays,  '•  I  do  not  affirm  that  there  are  in  them  any 
considerable  corruptions,  or  alterations."  Credibility  of  Gospel 
History,  vol.  2.  p.  69.  Blondel,  Daille,  Salmasius,  and  Albertinus 
acknowledge  that  we  have  the  epistles  which  Eusebius  had.  See 
Eusebius,  L.  3.  c.  32.  Bowden,  vol.  1.  p.  174,  Bp.  White's  Lec- 
tures, p.  457.     Skinner,  p.  IGu 


22 

1;lie  altar  is  pure,  but  he  that  is  without,  that  is,  that 
does  any  thing  without  the  bishop,  and  presbyters,  and 
deacons,  is  not  pure  in  his  conscience."  Hj^.  to  Tral- 
lianSy  sect.  1.  "  See  that  ye  all  follow  your  bishop, 
as  Jesus  Christ,  the  father,  and  the  presbytery,  as  the 
apostles,  and  reverence  the  deacons  as  the  command  of 
God.  Let  no  man  do  any  thing  of  what  belongs  to  the 
church  separately  from  the  bishop.'^  Ej).  to  Smyr- 
nceansy  sect.  8.  "  I  salute  your  very  worthy  bishop, 
and  your  venerable  presbytery,  and  your  deacons,  my 
fellow  servants."  Ibid.  sect.  12. 

The  only  remaining  father  of  this  early  period,  whose 
writings  can  be  adduced  in  this  controversy,  isPolycarp^ 
and  all  that  is  now  extant  of  his  writings,  is  an  epistle 
to  the  church  at  Philippi,  in  which  he  does  not  himself 
speak  of  three  distinct  orders,  yet  he  recommends  to 
the  Philippians,  the  above  mentioned  epistles  of  Igna- 
tius, Avhich,  we  have  seen,  are  unequivocal  on  the 
subject. 

Here  then  are  two,  if  not  three,  witnesses  testifying 
to  the  existence  of  Episcopacy  in  the  early  part  of  the 
second  century.  These  men  lived  almost  within  the 
fipostolic  age  ;  the  last  of  them,  indeed,  is  said  to  have 
conversed  with  the  apostles  ;  and  Jerome  says,  he  was 
consecrated  bishop  of  Smyrna  by  St.  John.  There 
are  no  other  christian  writings  of  this  period  extant,  ex- 
cept a  few  fragments  preserved  by  other,  and  later 
fathers,  which,  however,  contain  no  evidence  on  this 
subject. 

Thus  we  have  the  testimony  of  scripture,  to  the 
apostolic  establishment  of  Episcopacy,  and  the  concur- 
rence of  all  the  christian  writers  of  the  first  century, 


2f3 

who   mentron  the  subject,  to  its  continuance  to  thci? 
time. 

Irenaeus,  Bisliop  of  Lyons  in  France,  lived  about 
seventy  years  after  the  last  of  the  apostles.  The  Re- 
viewer quotes  Mr.  Sparks  as  asserting  that  he  was  or- 
dained by  presbyters,  but  there  is  no  evidence,  that  we 
have  yet  seen,  by  which  this  assertion  can  be  supported. 
When  but  a  preshytev  he  was  sent  with  an  account  of 
tlie  sufferings  of  the  churches  at  Lyons  and  Vienne,  to 
Eleutherus,  Bishop  of  Rome.  Pothiims,  Bishop  of 
Lyons,  had  just  received  martyrdom.  Irenseus,  either 
at  Rome,  or  on  his  return,  was  consecrated  his  successor. 
He  states,  that  the  church  of  Rome  was  founded  by  the 
apostles,  names  the  first  twelve  bishops,  and  then  as- 
serts,— '^' By  this  SMCcessio)?,  that  tradition  in  the  church, 
and  publication  of  the  truth,  which  is  from  the  apostles, 
is  come  to  us." — Boole  against  Heresies,  lib.  iii.  c.  3, 
Again — "^*  The  apostolic  tradition  is  present  in  every 
church.  We  can  enumerate  those  who  were  constituted 
bishops  by  the  apostles,  in  the  churches,  and  their  sue 
cessors,  who  tauglit  no  such  tiling.  By  showing  the 
tradition,  and  declared  faith  of  the  most  ancient  church 
of  Rome,  which  she  received  from  the  apostles  and 
which  is  even  come  to  us  through  the  succession  of 
bishops,  we  confound  all  who  conclude  otherwise  than 
as  they  ought." — Ibid.  Again — **'  We  can  reckon  up- 
to  you  those  who  w  ere  instituted  bishops  by  the  apostles 
themselves, — to  whom  they  committed  the  churches, — 
left  them  their  successors,  delivering  up  to  them  their 
own  proper  place  of  mastership.*' — Ibid.  Now 
let  these  passages  be  viewed  in  connection  with  what 
has  been  already  stated  from  scripture  and  the  early 
fathers. 


25 

Clement  of  Alexandria  floiirislied  about  twenty  year? 
later  than  Irenoeus.  Having  pointed  out  some  texts  of 
scripture  as  applicable  to  Christians  in  general,  he- 
says,— "There  are  other  precepts  Avithout  number,  some 
which  relate  to  presbyters,  others  which  belong  to 
bishops,  and  others  respecting  deacons."'  Poeda^og.  L. 
iii.  c.  12.  Clement  was  a  presbyter  under  Demetrius 
bishop  of  Alexandria. 

TertuUian  flourished  about  A.  D.  200.  He  says — • 
"  The  chief  or  liighest  priest,  who  is  the  hisliop,  has  the 
right  of  giving  baptism,  and  after  Iiim  the  presbyters^ 
and  deacons,  but  not  witliout  the  bisliop's  authority.*' 
(De  Baptisnw.  c.  il.J  The  following  extracts  from 
the  same  father  will  iUustrate  the  quotations  above  froni 
Irenseus  :  appealing  to  the  rulers  of  the  Homaii  Empire 
in  favor  of  the  persecuted  Christians,  he  says, — "  We 
are  but  of  yesterday,  and  we  have  filled  your  cities, 
islands,  towns,  and  boroughs,- — the  camp,  the  senate, 
and  the  forum.  Our  adversaries  lament  that  every  age^ 
sex,  and  condition  are  converts  to  the  name  of  Christ.'' 
fJipol.  c.  SI.  J  Again  :  speaking  of  many  countries  in 
which  Christianity  prevailed,  he  says,  "In  almost  every 
city  we  form  the  greater  part."  fM  Scap.  c.  2.  J  "  I 
do  allow," — says  Paley,* — "  that  these  expressions  are 
loose,  and  may  be  called  declamatory.  Eut  even  de- 
clamation hath  its  bounds  ;  this  public  boasting,  upon  a 
subject  which  must  be  known  to  every  reader,  was  not 
only  useless  but  unnatural,  unless  the  truth  of  the  case, 
in  a  considerable  degree,  correspond  with  the  descrip- 

*  Works. — Boston  Ed.  Vol.   ii.    (Evidences)  p.  330,     See  al?o 
Bowden,  vol.  iii.  pp.  HO — 3 


25 

tion  ;  at  least,  unless  it  had  been  both  true  and  no- 
torious, that  great  raultitinles  of  Christians,  of  all  ranks 
and  orders  were  to  be  found  in  most  parts  of  the  Roman 
Empire."  Was  this  the  case  at  this  early  period  ? 
And  will  it  be  said  that  tlie  bishops  mentioned  in  the 
above  quotations,  were  ^''parochial  clergymen  and 
nothing  more  ?"     It  is  incredible. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  continue  these  extracts,  as  Euse- 
bius,  who  lived  about  a  liumlred  years  later  than  Ter- 
"tullian,  and,  from  his  situation  and  character,  must 
have  been  competent  to  the  task,  amply  testifies  to  the 
fact  in  cpiestion.  He  furnishes  us  with  lists  of  the 
bishops  who  have  successively  presided  in  the  churches 
of  Antioch,  Jerusalem,  Home,  and  Alexandria,  taken 
by  himself  from  the  records  of  those  churches.*  "  There 
can  be  no  making  light  of  his  testimony,''  says  Bishop 
White.  Blondel,  Salmasius,  and  Daille,  all  great 
champions  of  presbyterianism,  and  opposevs  of  Kpisco- 
pacij,  admit  that  diocesan  Episcopacy  Avas  the  general 
government  of  the  church,  before  the  time  of  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  whom  we  quoted  above.  Du  Moulin,  in 
his  defence  of  presbyterianism,  says, — "Truly  the 
Episcopal  form  of  government,  all  churches,  every 
where,  received,  presently  after  the  apostles  times,  or 
even  in  their  times,  as  ecclesiastical  history  wit- 
nesseth."     Bucer,  Calvin,  Baxter,  and  Leclerc,   say 

*  The  first  Bishop  of  Jerusalem  was  St.  James  ;  (Acts  xv.  13. 
and  xxi.  18.)  of  Rome,  Linus  ;  of  Alexandria,  St.  Mark  ;  of  Antioch, 
Evodius  ;  of  Athens,  Dionysius,  the  Areopagite ;  of  Ephesus, 
Timothy;  of  Crete,  Titus;  of  Smyrna,  Polycarp  ; — all  of  them 
©rdained,  and  constituted  bishops  of  the  respective  churches  by 
the  apostles  themselves. 
4 


26 

the  same  in  substance.    Doddridge  admits  its  existence 
in    the  time  of   Ignatius.*      But  even    were   we  to 

*  Bowden,  vol.  i.  159 — and  ii.  135.  Religious  World  displayed, 
by  the  Rev.  R.  Adam.  Philad.  Ed.  vol.  ii.  p.  282.  We  must  not, 
however,  pass  without  notice  the  proof  which  the  Reviewer  gives 
us  from  Jerome  that  Episcopa  government  was  an  usurpation. 
The  extract  is  as  follows. — "  Till  through  the  instinc*t  of  the 
devil,  there  grew  in  the  church,  factions,  and  among  the  people  it 
began  to  be  professed,  I  am  of  Paul,  and  I  of  Apollos,  and  I  of 
Cephas,  churches  were  governed  by  the  common  advice  of  pres- 
byters, but  when  every  one  began  to  reckon  those  whom  he  had 
baptized,  his  own,  and  not  Christ's,  it  was  decreed  in  the  whole 
worlds  that  one,  chosen  out  of  the  presbyters,  should  be  placed 
over  the  rest,  to  whom  all  care  of  the  church  should  belong,  and 
so  the  seeds  of  schism  be  removed."  This  passage  cer- 
tainly proves,  that  the  congregational,  or  presbyterian  system, 
was  fruitful  in  schisms,  and  that  Episcopacy  was  found  the  most  ef- 
fectual antidote.  But  can  the  Reviewer  inform  us  what  period 
Jerome  refers  to  ?  We  have  no  doubt  !hiit  it  is  to  the  time  when 
Paul  actually  used  the  language  which  Jerome  quotes.  It  is  very 
evident,  we  think,  from  the  scriptures,  that  none  of  the  apostles, 
(James,  perhaps,  excepted)  located  themselves  at  an  early  period, 
but,  with  those  whom  they  had  chosen  into  their  number,  general- 
ly did  the  work  of  Evangelists,  travelling  for  the  wider  spread  of 
the  gospel,  "  ordaining  elders  in  every  church  ;"  to  whom  doubt- 
less they  committed  the  local  or  pastoral  government,  at  the  same 
time  exercising  over  them  a  general  superintendence.  The  schism  at 
Corinth  demonstrated  the  necessity  of  a  local  and  resident  Episcopa- 
cy. They  accordingly, — Jerome  tells  us, — established  it  "  through- 
out the  world."  And  it  is  remarkable,  that  the  epistles  to  Timo- 
thy and  Titus  in  which  Paul  charged  them  with  the  governmenf. 
of  the  churches  at  Ephesus  and  Crete,  and  instructed  them  how 
to  proceed  in  calling  men  to  the  ministrj^,  &c.  were  both  written, 
either  in  the  same  year,  or  subsequently,  to  that  in  which  the 
first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians  was  written.  The  same  remark 
applies  to  the  epistle  to  the  Philippians.     We,  elsewhere,  find 


27 

admit,  that  the  apostles  established  Congregationalism, 
or  presbyterianism,  still  it  is  allowed  on  all  sides  that 
a  different  state  of  things  existed  at  the  time  of  which 
we  are  now  ^^Titing  ;  how,  or  when,  or  by  whom,  was 
this  change  effected  ?  It  must  have  been  known  for  a 
long  time  afterward  ; — there  must  have  been  some  re- 
cords of  the  fact,  for  we  find  events  of  much  less  im- 
portance amply  attested  ; — we  should  have  heard  of  it, 
at  least,  by  allusion,  but  the  silence  of  those  who 
slumber  in  the  grave  is  not  more  perfect,  than  is  that  of 
all  antiquity  on  this  point ;  no  syllable  can  be  produced 
to  attest  it  ;  all  the  evidence  we  possess  of  the  early 
history  of  the  church  is  against  it ; — those  who  have  at- 
tempted to  establish  it,  have  generally  disagreed  as  to 
the  period  ; — and  yet  in  the  face  of  all  this,  there  are 
men  who  can  assert  that  Episcopacy  was  an  usurpa- 
tion !  "  When" — says  Chillingworth — that  Chilling- 
worth  whom  the  Reviewer  represents,  with  others,  as 
merely  acquiescing  in  Episcopacy, — "When  I  shall  see 
all  the  democracies,  and  aristocracies  in  the  world,  lie 
down  to  sleep,  and  awake  into  monarchies  ;  then  will 
1  begin  to  believe,  that  presbyteriau  government,  (and 
we  suppose  we  may  be  permitted  to  say — or  congrega- 

Jerome  expressly  mentioning-,  that  Timothy  was  made  Bishop  of 
Ephesus,  Titus  of  Crete,  and  Epaphroditus  of  Phihppi,  by  St.  Paul. 
In  another  place  he  says,  (we  quote  it,  to  show  that  he  does  not 
speak  of  parochial  bishops) — "  We  may  know  that  the  apostolic 
traditions  were  taken  from  the  Old  Testament  ;  that  which  Aaron, 
and  his  sons,  and  the  Levites,  were  in  the  temple,  let  the  bishops, 
presbyters,  and  deacons,  claim  to  themselves  in  the  church." 
{Ep.  ad  Evag.)  See  Bowden,  vol.  i.  letter  1.  and  vol.  iii.  let.  5. 
Hobart's  Festivals  and  Fasts,  2d.  ed.  p.  36.  Slater's  Original 
Draught,  p,  207.     Skinner's  Primitive  Truth,  p.  223. 


28 

iionalf)  having  continued  in  the  church  from  the  apostles' 
times,  should  presently  after  he  whirled  about  like  a 
stone  in  a  masque,  and  be  transformed  into  Epis- 
copacy/*'! 

t  Quoted  in  Rev.  R.  Adam"?  Religious  World,  vol.  ii.  p.  282. 
See  Chillingworth's  Apostolic  Institution  of  Episcopacy  demon- 
strated. The  testimony  of  Cyprian,  Bp.  of  Carthage,  Firmilian, 
Bp.  of  Caesarea,  Jerome,  Hilary  the  deac6a,Xiirysostom,  Bp.  of 
Constantinople,  and  others  which  we  cannot  quote,  may  be  seen 
in  Bowden,  vol.  i.  letters  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6.  As  to  the  confident  as- 
sertion of  Mr.  Sparks,  that,  "  Bishops  were  for  a  long  time  or- 
dained by  presbyters  at  Alexandria,""  we  refer  our  readers  to  Bp. 
Pearson's  vindication  of  the  epistles  of  Ignatius,  where  he  quotes 
several  authors,  who  particularly  mention  that  the  Bishop  of 
Alexandria  was  always  ordained,  not  by  presbyters,  but  by  a 
bishop.  We  shall  adduce  one.  Simeon  Metaphrastes  says  of  St. 
Mark,  that  "  he  ordained  as  his  successor,  Anianus,  Bishop  of 
Alexandria :  and  gave  to  other  churches,  bishops,  presbyters,  and 
deacons."  Lib.  xi.  c.  43.  See  also  Eusebius,  lib.  ii.  c.  15.  The 
Reviewer,  not  content  with  adopting  Mr.  S's  opinion  with  regard 
to  the  Alexandrian  church,  says  farther,  that  the  church  at  Car- 
thage was  congregational  !  So  said  Sir  P.  King  before  him.  Slater, 
after  examinmgand  refuting  all  his  arguments,  says  of  this  church, 
that,  "  little  as  she  was  in  her  flourishing  times  of  peace  and 
safety,  the  number  of  her  lapsed  members  only.,  was  such,  in  the 
Decian  persecution,  that  thousands  of  tickets  were  daily  granted 
by  the  martyrs  and  confessors  on  their  behalf,  to  procure  their 
reconciliation  with  the  church, — what  manner  of  single  congrega- 
tion such  a  church  would  make  before  the  fatal  fall  of  so  vast  a 
number  of  her  members,  and  after  their  blessed  union  again,  I 
leave  to  any  impartial  man  to  judge."  Original  Draitght,  p.  99. 
We  have  seen  above,  what  Tertullian,  who  was  a  native  of  this 
city,  says  of  the  prevalence  of  Christianity  in  the  cities  of  the 
Empire.  The  address  of  St.  Cyprian's  39th  epistle  alone  would 
prove  the  establishment  of  Episcopacy  in  Carthage.  Indeed  so 
strong  is  the  testimony  to  this  effect,  that  Dr.  Bowden,  says  vol.  i. 


29 

As  it  respects  iiie  origin  of  the  cburcii  of  Rome  it  is 
jiot  necessary  to  our  purpose  to  go  into  particulars  liere; 
tlie  fact  that  it  commenced  with  Episcopacy,  being  uni- 
versally admitted.  Tlie  difficulty  respecting  the  first 
seven  bishops  is  substantially  only  a  difficuiiy  about 
names.  There  is  reason  however  to  believe,  as  shown 
by  Dr.  Hammond,  that  the  Jewish  and  Gentile  converts 
differing,  as  they  did,  in  many  observances,  had  also 
their  separate  bishops,  and  to  this  cause  is  the  confu- 
sion in  this  respect,  perhaps,  to  be  traced.  Nor  are  we 
concerned  with  the  succession  in  that  see  to  a  later 
period,  than  thetimeof  Gregory  the  great,  as  he  is  called, 
memorable  for  his  refusing  the  title  of  universal  bishop, 
which  is  now  meant  by  that  of  Pope,  and  for  sending  to 
Britain,  Augustin,  who  was  the  first  Bishop  of  Canter- 
bury. 

We  believe  the  assertion  that  ^^  English  bishops  were, 
at  an  early  period,  consecrated  by  presbyters,*'  to  be 
destitute  of  credibility.  On  turning  to  Mr.  Sparks's 
book  to  discover  the  instance  alluded  to,  we  find  he  re- 
fers to  an  occurrence,  which,  so  far  as  we  can  understand 
from  his  statement,  (and  we  are  not  able  to  refer  to 
Doddridge)  took  place  in  Scotland.  What  relation  it 
bears  to  the  English  succession  we  do  not  see.  On  re- 
ferring to  Dupin  we  find  that  about  this  time  Adeodatus 
was  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  ;  he,  dying,  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Theodorus,  ordained  at  Rome  and  sent  to 
England  in  668  at  the  request  of  King  Egbert.     Just 

p,  71.  '•  Look,  sir,  at  the  sun  when  it  is  blazing  in  the  firmament, 
and  say  it  doc  -  not  shine,  and  you  will  come  as  near  the  truth,  as 
when  you  say  Cy^irian  was  the  bishop  of  but  a  sing^le  congrega- 
tion." See  Skinner's  Primitive  Truth,  p.  231,  for  the  aacient 
distinction  between  diocesf  and  parish. 


before  this  event,  Wilfred,  educated  at  Home,  and  or- 
dained priest  by  Hagilbert,  Bisiiop  of  Dorchester,  was 
nominated  Bishop  of  York.  There  being  then  but  one 
bishop  in  England,  he  went  to  Paris  and  was  there  con- 
secrated by  the  Bishop  of  Paris,  and  others.  "  During 
his  absence  they  that  stood  for  the  way  of  the  Irish 
churches  (on  the  subject  of  the  clerical  tonsure  and  the 
observance  of  Easter)  persuaded  King  Oswi  to  put  into 
the  cliurch  of  York  Ceadde,  Abbot  of  Lindisferne,  wJio 
was  consecrated  hy  one  English  and  two  British 
f  Welsh  J  Bishops.^^^-  Wilfi-ed  returning,  the  King 
gave  him  the  diocese  of  Litchfield,  and  he  supplied  the 
diocese  of  Canterbury  during  the  interval  between  the 
death  of  Adeodatus  and  the  arrival  of  Theodorus. 
Here  then  we  see  that  there  were  six  bishops  at  least  in 
England  and  Wales,  about  the  tiuie  in  which  Mr. 
S.  considers  Episcopacy  to  have  become  nearly  extinct. 

*  Dupin's  Eccles.  Hist.  London  ed.  1693,  pp.  45—125.  "  These 
matters  of  fact, — he  says, — are  certain,  heing  affirmed  by  Eddi, 
who  was  Wilfred's  disciple  and  author  of  his  life, — by  Pope  John 
the  Vllth's  letters, — and  the  naiTatives  of  Bede,  and  William  of 
Malmesbury."  While  referring  to  Mr.  Sparks's  work  we  will  no- 
tice what  happens  just  now  to  strike  our  sight  on  the  opposite 
page  (36)  to  the  one  we  have  been  commenting  on.  The  senti- 
ment ascribed  to  Eusebius  is  not  his,  but  appears  to  be  quoted, 
through  Doddridge,  perhaps,  from  Milton,  "  whose  rage  against 
Episcopacy  was  too  great," — as  Bp.  White  justly  observes, — "to 
permit  the  exercise  of  his  judgement  on  any  point  connected  with 
it."  Eusebius  referring  to  the  lesser  dioceses,  intimates,  that "  it 
cannot  be  affirmed  how  many^  arid  what  sincere  followers  of  the 
apostles,  have  governed  those  churches,  but  so  far  forth  as  may 
be  gathered  out  of  the  words  of  Paul."  This  passage  is  at  the 
place  of  his  second  reference  ;  the  Jirst  is  to  a  chapter  not  in  the 
book. 


Indeed  whoever  examines  the  history  of  the  church,  at 
this  period,  and  observes  the  stress  laid  upon  the  suc- 
cession— the  frequent  appeals  to  Rome  in  matters  of  dis- 
cipline, &c.  and  the  influence  of  that  see  in  England^ 
will  not  be  content  with  doubtful  assertions  impugning 
acknowledged  facts,  but  will  require  indubitable  testi- 
mony before  h&  surrenders  his  opinion.  Such  testimony, 
we  humbly  conceive,  is  not  to  be  produced.  Dr. 
Campbell,  Dr.  Miller  and  other  able  opponents  of  Epis- 
copacy, appear  either  not  to  be  aware  of  the  circum- 
stance on  which  Mr.  S.  relies,  or  what  is  most  probable, 
deemed  it  unworthy  of  credit. 

It  is  believed  that  no  other  diflRculties  are  alleged, 
affecting  the  succession,  till  the  time  of  Elizabeth,  and 
those  which  were  then  urged  by  the  partizans  of  Rome, 
(and  are  now  it  seems  to  be  urged  anew  by  another 
class  of  men,)  were  not  very  important.  They  laboured 
to  prove  that  the  bishops  who  consecrated  Matthew 
Parker,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  were  not  themselves 
consecrated,  but  it  appears  that  they  were  true  bishops, 
although  they  had  been  deprived  of  their  jurisdiction 
by  Mary.*  In  the  same  breath,  they  asserted  that  the 
reformers  did  not  hold  to  the  necessity  of  consecration 
to  that  office,  and  yet,  that  they  liad  forged  records  to 
prove  Bishop  Parker  to  be  duly  consecrated  !  But 
these  were  not  the  opinions  at  Rome,  for  it  is  clearly 
testified  by  two  respectable  historians  that  Pius  IV. 
offered  Elizabeth  to  confirm  what  she  had  done,  pro- 
vided  his  supremacy  was  acknowledged.f 

*  Robert  Adam's  Religious  World,  vol.  ii.  p.  381. — jXote. 
t  Cambden's  Elizabeth,  and  Baker's  Chron,  Anno.   1560.     We 
have  before  us  a  work  by  a  romanist  containing'  6i"teen  proposition.': 


32 

We  know  that  Archbishop  Bancroft  has  been  fre- 
quently quoted  as  saying  that  ordination  by  jjresbjjtevs 
was  valid.  But  on  what  occasion  was  this  expression 
said  to  have  been  made  ?  Wlien  three  ministers  of 
the  Scotcli  church,  presbyterially  ordained,  were  called 
up  to  London  to  be  consecrated  bishops.  If  the  ordi- 
nation by  presbyters  was  valid,  where,  we  Avould  ask, 

why  the  EngUsh  orders  are  not  valid.  Among-  others, — they 
were  not  legal,  nor  canonical ; — legal  accoi'ding  to  the  laws  oi" 
Mary  then  partially  in  force, — canonical  according  to  the  canons  of 
the  church  of  Rome.  For  the  benefit  of  the  Reviewer  and  his 
friends,  we  will  lay  before  our  readers  the  last  proposition,  meant, 
as  we  suppose,  for  the  strongest.  '■'•  It  cannot  be  safe  for  a  Chris- 
tian to  continue  iu  a  communion,  where  there  are  no  true  orders 
of  bishops,  and  priests,  or  at  least  no  certainty  of  such  orders. 
Because,  without  true  orders  they  can  have  no  sacrament  &.c.  no 
absolution,  no  eucharistic  sacrifice,  no  lawful  preaching,  no  ke3's 
&c.  in  a  word,  no  church  and  no  Christ,"  &c.  We  suspect  that 
congregationalists  come  in  for  a  share  of  anathema  here.  The 
validity  of  the  English  orders  has  been  proved  in  an  elaborate 
work,  by  Le  Courayer,  a  divine  of  the  French  church  ;  but  it 
brought  him  under  the  censures  of  his  brethren,  and  obliged  him 
to  take  refuge  among  those  whom  he  had  defended.  The  "  in- 
foj'mality  in  English  ordinations,"  which  we  are  told,  the  rom.anist 
considers  as  nullifying  them,  was  simply,  the  omission  in  the  ritual 
of  Edward  the  VI.  of  words  designating  in  the  sentence  of  ordina- 
tion, the  peculiar  office  to  which  the  candidate  was  admitted, 
though  it  was  fully  expressed  in  the  former  and  latter  parts  of  the 
services.  The  truth  is,  the  reformers  were  desirous  of  conform- 
ing as  strictly  as  possible  to  the  scriptural  practice  ;  the  woi'ds 
used  in  consecrating,  therefore,  were  similar  to,  if  not  the  same 
with,  those  used  by  our  Saviour  in  ordaining  the  apostles.  Mil- 
bourne  in  his  Legacy  to  the  church  of  England,  vol.  i.  p.  302.  et 
seq.  shows  that  a  similar  defect,  if  it  is  one,  existed  in  the  Greek 
ordinal,  and  that  the  orders  of  the  Greek  church  were  neverthe- 
less allowed  at  Rome. 


83 

\vas  the  necessity  for  Spatswood  and  his  brethren,  to 
receive  imposition  of  Episcopal  hands,  that  their  future 
ordinations  mii^ht  be  such  ?  ••  A  different  account  how- 
ever is  given," — -says  Dr.  Bowden, — '^  by  Heylin, 
Collier,  and  Gray.  Archbishop  liancroft  said,  there 
was  no  necessity  for  their  passing  through  the  inter- 
mediate orders  of  deacon  and  priest,  as  the  Episcopal 
character  might  be  conveyed  at  a  single  consecration  ; 
and  for  this,  he  cited  two  precedents  in  the  ancient 
church,  Ambrose,  Bishop  of  Milan,  and  Nectariusj 
Bishop  of  Constantinople."  And  it  was  doubtless  on 
this  ground,  that  Bishop  Andrews,  who  first  suggested 
the  difficulty,  assisted  in  their  consecration.  Bishop 
Burnet,  however,  says  that  the  question  was  overruled 
by  King  James. ^  The  three  bishops  returned  to  Scot- 
land and  consecrated  others,  "  by  which  means  a  true 
and  regular  Episcopacy  was  at  length  introduced  into 
the  reformed  church  of  Scotland," — says  Adam  ;  who 
also  quotes  Bishop  Guthry  as  saying,  that,  ^*  it  was 
not  without  the  consent  and  furtherance  of  many  of  the 
wisest  among  the  ministry."  Their  Episcopacy,  cer- 
tainly, was  but  of  short  duration.  In  twenty-eight 
years  occurred  an  event,  which  the  Reviewer,  after  the 
example  he  has  set  us,  will  certainly  pardon  us  for  not 
easily  forgetting,  and,  surely,  we  have  some  cause  to 
remember  it.  The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  for 
the  entire  extirpation  of  prelacy,  was  framed,  sworn 
to,  and  carried  into  unrelenting  execution.  But  this  is 
a  subject,  on  which,  we  must  thank  the  Reviewer  for  it, 
we    shall  have    occasion  to   speak  hereafter.      The 

♦History  of  his  own  times,  vol.  i.  p.  139.     See   also  Collier's 
Eccles.  Hist.  vol.  ii.  p.  702. 
.5 


a4 

bishops  were  driven  into  exile,  where  all  died^  except 
one.  Twenty-four  years  afterward,  Episcopacy  was 
again  restored  to  Scotland.  Four  persons  were  conse- 
crated bishops  in  England  ;  two  of  them  being  pre- 
viously admitted  deacons  and  priests  ;  and  the  others 
already  in  Episcopal  orders.  From  that  time  to  the 
present,  the  succession  has  been  regularly  preserved  in 
that  country,  and  it  was  by  the  imposition  of  the  hands 
of  three  of  their  successors  that  the  late  Bishop  Sea-^ 
bury  of  Connecticut,  derived  his  Episcopal  autliority.f 

It  is  admitted,  by  the  Reviewer,  that  the  ^English 
succession  may  be  traced  upward  to  Archbishop  Parker. 

It  is  sometimes  attempted  by  our  opponents  to  ^how, 
that  the  reformers,  did  not  believe  in  the  di\ine  institu- 
tion of  Episcopacy.  It  was  in  the  second  year  of  the 
Feign  of  Edward  VI.  that  the  reformed  ordinal  was 
adopted  ;  from  it  we  select  the  following  passages  f — 
*^  It  is  evident  unto  all  men  diligently  reading  Holy 
Scripture  and  ancient  authors,  that  from  the  apostles' 
time,  there  have  been  these  orders  of  ministers  in 
Christ's  church,  bishops,priests  and  deacons."  Preface. 
^^  Almighty  God,  who,  by  thy  divine  providence  hast 
appointed  divers  orders  of  ministers  in  thy  church,  and 
didst  inspire  thine  apostles  to  choose  into  the  order  of 
deacons,"^&c.  "  Almighty  God,  giver  of  all  good  things, 
who  by  thy  Holy  Spirit  hast  appointed  divers  orders  of 
ministers  in  ih  J  chm-ch,^^  kc.  Collects.  Other  passage* 
might  be  produced  to  the  same  import,   but  these  are 

t  For  a  list  of  their  bishops,  see  Skinner's  Prim.  Truth,  Appen- 
(2tx,  No.  i.  p.  341.  or,  Journals  Gen.  Coavention  Prot.  Ep.  Ch.  in 
U.  S. (1789)  p.  108. 


35 

sufficient.  Noav  is  it  possible  that  men,  such  as  those 
were  who  drew  this  ordinal,  could  deliberately  state 
these  sentiments, — suffer  them  to  go  down  to  posterity 
as  theirs  ;  nay,  could  embody  them  in  prayers  to  God, — 
in  prayers  which  they  expected  would  be  used  by  mul- 
titudes,— in  prayers  set  forth  to  be  used  at  solemn  ordi- 
nations, and  yet  not  believe  them  ?  It  would  be  a  sad 
blot  indeed  upon  their  memory,  if  there  were  any  ground 
on  Avhich  to  sustain  such  a  charge  of  perjury.  That 
there  might  be  some  among  them,  who,  in  expressing, 
on  ot!ier  occasions,  their  private  opinions,  would  not 
use  precisely  the  same  plmiselogy,  we  are  not  prepared 
to  deny.  This  was  not  a  period  when  the  temperature, 
or  aspect,  of  any  man's  mind,  was  of  the  same  grade,  or 
complexion,  with  all  those  around  him.  The  free 
spirit  of  inquiry  which  had  gone  forth,  v/as  greatly  ad- 
verse to  the  spirit  of  harmony  ;  and  it  is  something  in 
favour  of  the  demands  of  our  church,  that  it  was  so  well 
understood,  at  such  a  time,  on  what  points  to  rest.  We 
see  that  the  reformers  agreed  in  the  fact  that  these  three 
orders  were  established  by  inspired  apostles.  We  ask 
no  more.  We  are  not  disposed  to  quarrel  about  words. 
Both  the  Reviewer  and  Mr.  S.as  quoted  by  liim,  dis- 
cover a  pretty  strong  disposition  to  turn  against  us  the 
arms  of  the  church  of  Rome.  We  admit  that  we  have 
derived  the  succession  through  the  bishops  of  that  church, 
but  we  certainly  do  not  see  how  the  revocation  by  any 
bishop, — for  such  and  such  only,  do  we  allow  the  Pope 
to  be, — can  render  void  the  official  acts  of  one,  or  more 
bishops,  acting  within  tlieir  commissions,  and  by 
authority  equal  to,  and  transmitted  in  the  same  manner 
as  his  own.    Our  church  acknowledges  no  such  power ; 


36 

on  the  contrary  her  divines  have  uniformly  declared  this 
claim  of  power  on  his  part,  even  as  exercised  over  the 
Homish  church,  to  be  rank   usurpation.     Have  these 
writers  never  heard  of  the  resistance  made  to  this  princi- 
ple by  the  Gallican  clergy  ?     Will  the  platforms   of 
New-England  permit  a  pastor  of  one  independent  con- 
gregation to   exercise  such  power  over  the  pastor  of 
another  ?     The  cases  are  precisely  paralel.      In  this 
this  view  there  is  sometiiing  superlatively  absurd  in  the 
'^  argument"  which  the  Reviewer  condescends  "  to  sug- 
gest to  Mr.   S.  that  he  may  enlarge  upon  it  in  another 
edition."    We  should  hope,  on  the  contrary,  that  before 
Mr.  S.  commences  another  edition  he  would  study  the 
subject  thoroughly  for  himself— depend  less  on  "  the 
literary  republic  of  the  east,"  and  divest  himself  of  the 
iron   shackles  of  prejudice,  with  which,  in  truth,  he 
seems  overloaded,  while  he  thinks  himself  free.     If  the 
Reviewer  Avill  but  take  the  trouble  to  look  back  upon 
the  conduct  of  the  church  at  Rome,  he  will  find   that 
nearly  all  churches  which  have  not  submitted  to  the 
lawless  dominion  of  the  Pope,  have  not  only  been  ex- 
communicated, but  even  anathematised  ;  and  doubtless 
he  will  find  her  at  one  time  admitting, — then  denoun- 
cing,— and  then  again  admitting,   the  orders   of   the 
numerous  and  powerful  Greek  church.     But  what  does 
this  prove  ?  Nothing  but  an  inordinate  lust  of  power. 

The  Reviewer  conceives  he  has  no\v  arrived  at  a 
position  so  firm,  that  "  he  does  not  see  how  any  im- 
fartial  person"  can  fail  to  be  as  fully  persuaded  as 
himself.  When  a  writer  with  an  ex -parte  statement  tell^ 
his  readers  whatow^/z^  to  be  the  judgement  of  imjmrtial 
persons  he  deserves  to  be  suspected.     He  lias  iiothing 


87 

to  do  with  his  judges,  farther  than  to  state  his  argu- 
ments. And  when  he  descends  to  this  sort  of  cant,  we 
may  compare  him  to  a  lawyer,  wlio  should  tell  a  jury, 
that  if  they  would  be  impartial^  the^^  must  believe  all  he 
says.  We  are,  perhaps,  wasting  our  reader's  time  by 
remarks  of  this  sort,  but  it  is  fit  that  they  should  sec  how 
far  tlie  Reviewer  js  disposed  to  judge  for  them  in  this 
question. 

Notwithstanding  the  firmness  of  Jiis  position,  the 
Reviewer  seems  desirous  of  adding  a  sort  of  buttress  to 
increase  its  strcngtii,  by  asserting  that  till  some  impor- 
tant deficiency  is  found  in  it,  he  shall  be  quite  content  to 
rest  upon  it,  and  to  have  his  ordination  '•  as  regular  as 
that  of  Barnabas  and  Paul,  who  were  ordained  by  cer- 
tain jjvojjjiets  and  teachers  at  Jiyitiochy 

We  suppose,  the  Reviewer  w  ould  wish  to  be  under- 
stood here,  as  referring  to  congregational  ordination. 
If  so,  Ave  are  somewhat  doubtful,  whatever  may  have 
been  his  individual  case,  whether  those  who  have  pre- 
ceeded  him,  in  his  shadowy  line,  have  been  so  favoured 
as  to  have  prophets  and  teachers  for  their  ordainers. 
He  v^'ill  not,  we  suppose,  be  willing  to  allow  Robert 
Brown  to  be  the  founder  of  his  sect,  nor  w  ould  we  be 
so  uncharitable  as  to  trace  its  origin  to  that  man  of  un- 
happy memory  ;  yet  Robinson  of  Leyden,  who  w^as 
perhaps  its  true  founder,  admitted,  in  his  Apology  pub- 
lished at  Leyden,  in  1619,  that  they  were  commonly 
known  by  the  name  of  Brownists.  In  the  New-Eng- 
land memorial  there  is  an  account  of  what  is  believed 
to  have  becti  the  first  congregational  ordination  in 
America.  Al  Salem,  oii  the  sixth  of  August,  1629,  the 
ponfcssion  of  faith  and  covenant  being  solemnly  read, 


38 

thirty  persons  professed  their  consent  to  it,  and  then 
proceeded  to  ordain  Mr.  Shelton,  j^astor,  and  Mr. 
Higginson,  teacher,  of  the  church  there.  Gov.  Bradford 
of  Plymouth,  afterward  arrived  and  gave  them  the  right 
hand  of  fellowship.'^     Upon  this  point  we  might  dila^te, 

*  N.  England  Mem.  p.  82  and  onward  as  quoted  in  Churchman's 
Mon.  Blag.  a^oI.  ii.  p.  228.  See  also  Alden's  account  of  the  religious  so- 
cieties of  Portsmouth,  N.  H.  for  a  similar  transaction,  p.  29.  Trum- 
bull's Hist.  Connecticut,  vol.  i.  Ibid.  Hist.  U.  S.  vol.  i.  p.  89.  It  is 
not  easy  to  ascertain,  what  are  the  principles,  which,  in  our  daj, 
constitute  Congregationalism.  The  Cambridge  and  Sa^'brook  plat- 
forms are,  in  a  great  measure,  disused,  and  creeds  of  all  kinds  are 
becoming  very  unfashionable.  At  the  first  settlement  of  the 
country,  none  but  laymen  ordained,  and  their  ordination  was  im- 
posed, even  upon  those  who  had  previously  been  Episcopally  or- 
dained in  England.  This  ordination  was  performed,  either,  by  all 
the  members  of  the  church  as  at  Salem,  or  by  certain  members  of 
it,  called,  in  allusion  to  Proverbs  ix.  1. — the  seven  pillars.  If  a 
minister  of  another  congregation  was  present,  he,  as  a  general 
rule,  was  not  allowed  to  interfere,  lest  the  rights  of  the  church 
should  be  infringed.  Latterly,  a  diflTerent  practice  has  prevailed  ; 
a  council  of  laity  and  clergy  appoint  a  clerical  committee  to  per- 
form the  act  of  ordination.  If  the  minister  leaves  one  congrega- 
tion, and  is  chosen  to  another,  a  reordination  takes  place  after  the 
same  manner,  in  nearly  all  respects,  but  called  installation.  We 
suppose  then,  we  are  not  mistaken  in  the  belief,  that  the  essence 
of  Congregationalism  is,  that  each  separate  congregation  is  a  per- 
fect christian  church,  with  full  right  to  appoint  its  own  officers, 
though  the  ceremony  of  ordination,  which  is,  perhaps,  but  a 
pubhc  acceptance,  be  performed  by  others.  That  a  minister, 
then,  should  be  considered  lawfully  authorized  while  he  continues 
to  officiate  to  the  church  of  which  he  is  an  officer  is  reasonable, 
but  upon  what  ground  is  it,  that  he  is  permitted  to  exercise  the 
office.,  when  he  ceases  to  be  an  officer  ?  We  recollect  an  instance 
of  a  gentleman  who  began  his  career  with  the  title  oi  reverend.,  as 
minister  of  a  church  in  Boston  ;  and  terminated  it  with  the  title  of 
esquire.,  as   magistrate  of  a  neighbouring  town.     But  we  now  set 


39 

but  it  would  oblige  us  to  digi'css  to  too  gi-eat  an  extent. 
We  return  to  the  consideration  of  the  ordination^  as  the 
Reviewer  calls  it,  of  Paul  and  Barnabas.  Is  the  Re- 
viewer vvilling  to  rest  his  reputation  as  a  Biblical  critic, 
on  the  fact,  that  this  was  an  ordination  to  the  work  of 
the  ministry  by  which  these  apostles  were  now  first  com- 
missioned ?  What  then  does  Paul  mean,  when  he  says 
of  himself,  that  he  was  ^''an  apostle  not  of  men,  neither 
by  man,  but  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  God  the  father  ?'' 
fGal.i.l.J  Had  not  both  Barnabas  and  Paul  exer- 
cised their  ministry  before  this  time  at  other  places,  as 
well  as  a  whole  year  in  this  very  city  of  Antioch?  And 
were  they  not  in  truth  designated  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
fo^  a  special  mission  ;  the  performance  of  which  is  fully 
narrated  in  Acts  xiii.  and  xiv.  ?  "  The  Holy  Ghostj, 
said,  separate  me  Barnabas  and  Saul  for  the  work 
whcrcunto  I  liave  called  them." — ^^  So  they  being  sent 
forth  ])y  the  Holy  Ghost,  departed,"  &c. — visited  sun- 
dry places  where,  probably,  the  gospel  had  not  been 
preached, — gathered  churches,  renewed  their  visits  to 
some  of  them,  ordained  elders,  in  every  church,  and 
then  returned  to  Antioch  '^  from  whence  they  had  been, 
recommended  to  the  graee  of  God,  for  the  work  which 
they  had  fulfilled.'^  "  The  whole  history  of  the  con- 
version of  St.  Paul  shows  him  to  have  been  miraculous- 
ly called, — says  Bishop  White,^ — under  as  strong  evi- 
dence of  the  fact,  as  the  miraculous  appointment  of  the 
twelve.  Not  only  so,  he  says  expressly,  "  I  neither  re- 
persons  quitting  the  pastoral  charge,  accepting  professorships  in- 
colleges,  teaching  schools,  &c.  and  yet  retaining  the  clerical 
character.  We  do  not  wonder,  that  uniformity  and  consistency 
are  considered  hy  such  men  as  vices  in  the  Episcopal  church  '. 


40 

ceived  it  (tlie  gospel)  from  man  ;  iieltliei*  was  1  taiighi 
it,  but  by  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ."  (Gal.  i.  12.) 
And  again  in  regard  to  his  entrance  on  the  niinisti'yj — 
"I  conferred  not  with  flesh  and  blood."  (v.  16.)  And 
in  two  places  in  the  2  Cor.  (ix.  5  aiid  xii.  11.)  he  places 
himself  on  a  level  with  the  chief  of  the  apostles.* 

We  may  now,— we  trust, — be  permitted  to  use  the 
language  of  the  Reviewer,  under  a&  strong  conviction  of 
its  truth,  as  his,  tiiougli  in  a  different  sense.  "It  seem^ 
to  us,  that  there  are  not  many  things  in:  church  history 
which  less  admit  of  dispute  than  the  rise  and  establish- 
ment of  Episcopacy." 

The  Reviev/er  next  devotes  a  page  or  two,  to  a  neat 
speculation  on  the  rise  and  progress  of  Ecclesiastical 
government.  It  forcibly  reminds  us,  liovrever,  of  the 
author,  who  is  said  to  have  made  up  a  book  of  travels 
through  a  certain  country,  while  he  was  comfortably 
seated  in  his  own  closet.  The  book  would  pass  very 
well  among  those,  who  had  never  seen  the  country,  nor 
read  a  genuine  account  of  it,  but  very  different  would 
be  its  reception  with  those  who  had.  Just  so  with 
the  Reviewer.  His  account  may  pass  with  those 
who  will  not  examine  into  the  early  history  of  the 
church,  but  will  have  very  little  credit  with  those  who 
do.  He  gives  us  his  conceptions  of  such  a  church  as 
we,  probably,  might  have  had,  if  he  had  been  the  guide 
and  counsellor  of  the  apostles.  He  admits  that  "  the 
early  preachers  of  our  faith,  [apostles]  pursued  the 
course  which  men  Osgood  sense,  not  to  say  men  divinely 
inspired  might  be  expected  to  adopt,"  and  we  are  happy 

*  Lectures  on  the  Catechism,  p.  430.     See  also  Doddridje  fc- 
loc. — Bowden,  vol.  i.  p.  27B 


41 

to  find  him  allowing  thein  so  much  credit,  for  we  were 
really  ia  some  doubt  as  to  the  estimation  in  which,  ia 
this  respect  at  least,  Unitarians  are  disposed  to  regard 
them.  It  is  a  notorious  fact,  that  the  opponents  of 
Episcopacy,  have  not  been  able  to  agree  as  to  the  time 
in  which  it  was  imposed  on  the  church.  They  are  not 
only  at  variance  with  each  other  in  regard  to  this  cir- 
cumstance, but  they  are  equally  so  with  regard  to  the 
causes  which, — they  say, — produced  its  imposition. 
Some  of  them  impute  it  to  the  corruption  of  the  clergy, 
aye,  even  in  times  when  to  be  eminent  in  the  cause  of 
Christianity  was  to  set  one's  self  up  as  a  mark  for  the^ 
shafts  of  poAver  ; — when  the  putting  on  of  the  mitre, 
was  soon  followed  by  the  stripping  off  the  garments  at 
the  stake  : — in  times  when  even  the  heathen  enemies  of 
Christianity  speak  of  uncomraon  purity  of  life  and  prin- 
ciple, as  the  universal  characteristic  of  its  followers  ! 
Others  of  them  ascribe  it  to  the  virtue  and  piety  of  the 
church.  It  must  then  be  a  form  of  government  good  in 
itself,  and  they  should  blush  for  their  opposition  But 
was  it  a  pious  deed  to  overthrow  institutions,  which  our 
opponents  say,  were  founded  by  apostles  ?  Was  it  vir- 
tuous to  trample  upon  what  sacred  authority  had  estab- 
lished ?  The  Reviewer,  however,  seems  unwilling  to 
agree  with  either  of  these  classes,  but  supposes  that  the 
motives  which  led  to  one  usurpation  after  another,  were 
'•  like  a  mingled  yarn,  of  good  and  ill  together.'' 
What  credit  shall  we  give  to  either,  and  who  will  guide 
us  in  making  the  distinction  ? 

W^e  are  next  favoured  with  some  arguments,  to  ac- 
count for  the  moderation  of  the  reformers  in  stopping 
6 


42 

their  purgations  on  the  other  sidfe  of  Episcopacy,  in- 
stead of  opening  the  flood  gates  to  sweep  away  VQot 
and  branch.  We  do  not  doubt,  that  the  Reviewer  and 
his  party  are  very  willing  to  do,  w^iat  the  reformers 
omitted.  =f^  If  the  dispositions  manifested  in  this  Review, 
and  in  a  certain  ^*  Letter"  published  a  little  before,  are 
any  evidence,  we  certainly  are  at  liberty  to  draw  thi& 
conclusion.  AVe  thank  Grod,  that  these  writers  were 
not  in  the  place  of  the  reformers.  The  characters  and 
abilities  of  the  ecclesiastical  reformers  we  are  willing 
to  leave  to  the  estimation  of  all  m«n,  assuredly  believing 
that  they  stand  mi  too  sacred  ground, — that  they  are 
too  far  above  the  reach  of  malevolence,  to  be  injured  by 
pedantry  or  sectarian  bitterness.  Their  reputation  is 
as  a  rock,  and  has  stood  harder  buffets  by  far,  than 
these  writers  are  competent  to  give.  We  are  not 
now  speaking  of  rulers  and  kings,  nor  of  that  civil 
policy  which  might  lead  them,  now  to  cherish,  and 
now  to  discountenance,  the  efforts  of  pure  and  undefiled 

*  "  If  amidst  so  much  that  is  admirable,  in  the  character,  and  con- 
duct of  the  first  reformers,  we  might  be  permitted  to  allot  the 
meed  of  praise  to  any  particular  part,  I  should  have  no  hesitatioe 
in  assigning  it  to  that  singular  moderation  and  discernment,  which 
distinguished  the  Reformation  from  all  other  Revolutions, — which 
overcoming  the  common  infirmities  of  ou  r  nature,  by  which  men 
are  apt  to  run  from  one  extreme  to  its  opposite,  controlled  the 
spirit  of  innovation  in  the  moment  of  reform,  rejected  nothing 
without  examination,  retained  nothing  without  authority  ;  and 
when  it  abjured  the  usurpations  of  the  church  of  Rome,  discarded 
only  its  corruptions,  and  left  all  that  had  the  stamp  of  Christianity 
behind  ;  like  the  fire  which  separates  and  consumes  the  dross, — 
but  presjerves  and  refines  all  that  was  pure  in  the  ore."  Dr 
Toylor'^s  answer  to  the  question.^  Why  are  you  a  Churchman. 


43 

religiou,  escaping  fiom  the  enthraltneats  of  spiritual 
dominion  and  corruptiofi.f 

t  The  Reviewer  makes  use  of  an  old  puritan   parody   on  the 
scripture  ;  for  what  purpose  he  best  knows.     When  he  says  that 
the  Episcopal  church  "  still  stands  on  the  foundation   of  the  Lords 
.and  Commons  of  England,''''  did  he  mean  to  convey  the  idea,  that 
the   Episcopal  church  was  necessarily  dependant  on  the  church  of 
England,  or,  that  there  is  any  connection  between  the  church  in 
America,  and  the  government  of  England  ?     If  he  did,  and  one  or 
two  other  passages  bear  the  same  construction,  we  envy  neither 
his  opinion  nor  his  principle  :  and  not  much  more  honourable  to 
him  is    this  parody,  if  he    meant   to  assert  by  it,   that  even   the 
church  of  England  as  a  spiritual  communion  rests  on  that  founda- 
tion.    True,  he  quotes  Mr.  Sparks  as  saying,  that  "  the  power  of 
the   English  clergy  is  confessedly  derived  from  the  king  and  not 
from   any  church,"   but  it  is  the  precise   reverse   of  this  assertion 
which  is  true,  and  it  is  so  easily  proved  so,  that  we  might  positively 
dispute  the  learning  of  those    who  commit   themselves  upon   it. 
They  do  not  seem  to  comprehend  any  distinction  between  inherent 
povver.  and  legal  jurisdiction.     "  It  is  undeniable, — says  Dr.  Bowden, 
(vol.  ii.  p.  115.)  alluding  to  the  reign  of  Henry  Vlllth,  that  it  was 
the  doctrine  of  the  king,  of  the  bishops,  and  the  whole  nation,  that 
authority  to  administer  the   sacraments,  and  to  perform  all  other 
spiritual  offices,  was  derived  not  from  the  crown,  but  from  Christ. 
This  doctrine  was  explicitly  maintained  in  the  "  Institution  of  a 
christian  man,"  as  may  be  seen  by  consulting  CoUier.     And  that 
it  was  maintained  by  the  king,  is  evident  from  a  letter  of  his  to  the 
convocation  of  York,  explaining  the  supremacy.     That  letter  may 
be  seen  in   Chandler's  Appeal  defended,    (p.  51.)     Therein  the 
king  makes  a  clear  distinction  between  the  temporal  and  spiritual 
power  of  the  bishops;  the  former  he  derives  from  the  state, — the 
latter  from   Christ.     During  the  reign  of  Edward  Vlth,  bishops 
were  commonly  appointed  by  the  king's  letters  patent.    '■  By  those 
letters   it   is  clear, — says    Inshop  Burnet, — that  the    Episcopal 
function  was  acknowledged  to  be  of  d'n-ine  appointment,   and  that 
the  person  was  no  other  way   named   by  the  king  than  as   lay 


44 

The  next  weapon  with  which  the  Reviewei-  ^eeks  to 
prostrate  Episcopacy,  is  by  misrepresenting  the  opin- 

patrons  present  to  livings,  only  the  bishop  was  legally  authorised, 
in  such  a  part  of  the  king's  dominions,  to  execute  that  function 
which  was  to  be  derived  to  him  by  imposition  of  hands.''''  Hist. 
Refor.  ii.  128.  Adam  says, — "  That  the  Episcopal  character  is 
not  derived  from,  nor  alienable  by,  the  civil  power,  is  a  doctrine 
well  known  in  England,  as  well  as  in  Scotland  ;  for  when  Dr.  Par- 
ker was  consecrated,  upon  a  question  of  the  competency  of  bishops 
to  consecrate,  as  they  had  been  legally  deprived  in  the  late  reign, 
it  was  determined  that  as  they  had  been  once  consecrated,  the 
Episcopal  character  remained,  and  they  might  convey  it.  He  re- 
fers to  Neal,  vol  i.  c.  4. ;  to  Bishop  Jewel's  View  of  a  Seditious 
Bull,  p.  14.  can.  39.  and  to  Gray's  Bampton  Lectures,  passim.'''' 
Religious  World  displayed,  vol.  ii.  p.  381.  JVote.  Had  Mr.  Sparks, 
or  the  Reviewer,  have  examined  the  thirty-seventh  of  the  Articles 
of  Religion,  in  the  English  prayer  book,  they  would  have  found 
the  following  passage  which  we  think  sufficient  of  itself  to  put  this 
subject  to  rest.  "  Whereas  we  attribute  to  the  king's  majesty  the 
chief  government,  by  which  titles  we  understand  the  minds  of  sonie 
slanderous  folks  to  be  offended  :  we  give  not  to  our  princes  the 
ministering  either  of  God's  word,  or  of  the  sacraments,  the  which 
thing  the  injunctions  also,latterly  set  forth  by  Elizabeth  our  Queen, 
do  most  plainly  testify  ;  but  that  only  prerogative,  which  we  see 
to  have  been  given  always  to  godly  princes,  in  holy  scripture,  by 
God  himself ;  that  is,  that  they  should  rule  all  estates  committed 
to  their  charge  by  God,  whether  they  be  ecclesiastical,  or  tem- 
poral, and  restrain  with  the  civil  sword  the  stubborn  and  evil 
doers."  The  nomination  of  bishops  to  the  different  sees  had  no 
necessary  connection  with  the  supremacy,  for  it  had  been  exercised 
long  before,  while  the  English  church  had  submitted  to  the 
papacy.  It  may  be  proper  here  to  take  notice  of  an  assertion, 
bearing  some  connection  with  the  above,  which,  we  learn,  has  been 
openly  made,  and  which  we  find  repeated  in  a  book,  (Cooper's 
discourse  on  Asbury)  which  accident  threw  in  our  way,  that  the  or- 
flers  of  the  American  Episcopal  clergy  are  not  recognized  in  England, 


45 

ions  of  tlic  reformers.  We  suppose  those  whom  he 
now  brings  forward,  are  not  those  of  whom  he  had  just 
before  said,  ^*  learning  was  little  predicable,  and  piety 
still  less/'  as  in  that  case,  doubtless,  we  should  not 
be  favoured  with  this  statement  of  their  views.  Hebe- 
gins  with  Wickliffe,  whom  he  quotes  as  saying, — "  One 
thing  I  boldly  assert,  that,  in  the  primitive  church  two 
orders  were  thought  sufficient,  viz.  priests  and  dea- 
cons" &c.  But  Wickliife  also  held  the  doctrine  of  a 
stoical  fate,  and  that  all  things  proceeded  from  ne- 
cessity : — he  denied  infant  baptism  : — he  disallowed 
imposition  of  hands  in  ordination.  He  asserted  that 
God  always  acts  to  the  extent  of  his  power,  and  can  do 
nothing   otherwise,  nor  more,  than  he  does  : — that  he 

In  the  book  referred  to,  an  instance  is  adduced  of  the  Rev.  T. 
Vasey,  who  being  ordained  by  an  American  bishop  and  going  after- 
ward to  England,  "  was  not  acknowledged,  recognized,  or  known, 
as  a  minister  of  the  church  of  England."  Of  the  truth  of  this  in- 
stance we  have  no  doubt.  The  cause  will  be  explained  by  a  re- 
ference to  the  act  of  Parliament,  passed  in  1786,  which  permitted 
the  English  bishops  to  dispense  with  the  oaths  of  allegiance^  and 
certain  other  forms  imposed  by  the  government  of  that  country 
upon  those  who  are  admitted  to  Holy  Orders ;  and  these  being 
dispensed  with,  there  was,  of  course,  an  exclusion  of  those  bishops, 
and  of  all  clergymen  deriving  their  power  from  them  of  being 
"  enabled  to  exercise  their  respective  offices  within  his  majesty's 
dominions."  The  act  at  large  may  be  seen  in  the  Journals  of  the 
Gen.  Conventions,  p.  39 — and  in  Bishop  White's  Memoirs  of  the 
Prot.  Ep.  Church  in  the  U.  S.  p.  373.  Even  persons  ordained  by 
bishops  of  the  English  church  in  the  present  colonies  of  England, 
are  not  admitted  to  livings  in  that  country  on  the  same  terras  as 
native  clergymen.  Is  there  not  something  ridiculous  in  supposing 
that  the  English  church  disputes  an  authority  which  herself 
conveyed  ? 


46 

cannot  alter  the  state  of  the  creation^ — the  order  Qt 
things, — or  make  the  world  greater,  or  less  tlian  it  is  : — 
that  the  first  cause  is  limited  in  the  creation  of  human 
souls,  and  cannot  exceed  such  a  fixed,  and  determinate 
number,  or  annihilate  any  thing  i-rr^that  our  Saviour  had 
three  natures  in  a  separate  sense,  &c.*  These  im- 
puted opinions,  are  it  is  true,  taken  from  the  writings 
t)f  the  enemies  af  Wickliffe,  but,  so  likewise,  is  the 
opinion  given  as  his,  by  the  Reviewer.  Is  the  Re- 
viewer then  ready  to  adopt  Wickliife's  opinions  in  all 
respects,  or  will  he  subscribe  to  those  alone  which 
make  against  Episcopacy  ? 

The  Reviewer  also  brings  before  us  the  question,  or 
rather  one  of  the  questions  of  Henry  VIII.  to  his  pre^ 
lates.  To  the  tenth  question,  whether  bishops  or 
priests  were  first  ?  Cranmer  gave  the  following  answer, 
— ^'  Bishops  and  priests  were  at  one  time  and  were  no 
two  things  but  both  one  office,  in  the  beginning 
of  Christ's  religion."  And  to  this  we  most  fully 
assent  as  will  be  seen  by  recurring  to  our  scripture  ac- 
count of  the  orders  of  the  ministry.  "  The  two  ap- 
pellations for  the  second  order,  were  used  as  synoni- 
mous,  till  the  death  of  the  apostles,"  &c.  But  what 
was  meant  by  the  prelates  will  appea^r  by  their  an- 
swers to  the  11th  question  which  the  Reviewer  lias  not 
chosen  to  produce.  "  Whether  a  bishop  hath  authority 
to  make  a  priest,  by  scripture,  or  not  ?"  Dr.  Iled- 
mayn's  answer,  in  part  was  ; — ^''As  for  making,  that  is, 
to  say,  ordaining,  and  consecrating  of  priests,  I  think  it 
especially  belongeth  to  the  office  of  a  bishop,  as  far  as 
can  be  shown  from  scripture^  or  any  example  ^  as  I  sup- 

*  Collier,  as  quoted  l)y  Bowden.vol.  ii.  p,  81 


47 

pose  from  the  beginning."  "In  short," — ^says  Dr. 
Bowden,  from  whom  the  above  is  taken, — "  they  all 
agreed  that  none  but  bishops  liave  authority  to  make 
priests  ; — a  ^ew  making  exceptions  to  cases  of  extreme 
necessity/^'  It  is  obvious  that  the  term  bishop  in  this 
question  refers  to  bishops  as  then  constituted.* 

We  arc  next  told,  tliat  "  the  pretensions  to  a  divine 
right  of  Episcopacy  seems  indeed  to  have  been  first 
started  by  Dr.  Bancroft  in  1588.*'  And  yet  this  is  the 
same  Dr.  Bancroft,  wlio,  is  relied  on  to  prove  that 
presbyterian  ordination  was  considered  valid  in  the  case 
of  the  Scotch  Bishops  1  C'ould  he  hold  both  these 
opinions  ?  Certainly  not.  We  liave  shown  his  opinion 
in  the  latter  case  to  be  not  such  as  represented  by  our 
opponents.  ••  The  doctrine, — says  the  lleviewer, — 
was  then  so  new  even  to  high-churchmen,  that  Whit- 
gift,  than  wljom  no  man  was  ever  more  tenacious  of 
chiirch  autliorlLy,  said,  he  rather  wished  than  believed 
it  to  be  true."  The  want  of  credibility  to  this  anecdote, 
does  not  seem  to  have  staggered  our  opponents,  who 
bring  it  up  on  all  occasions  of  attack.  Dr.  Cliauocey 
quoted  it  from  Neal,  in  his  controversy  vvitli  Dr. 
Chandler  many  years  since.  Neal  refers  to  Strype's 
life  of  Whitgift.  Dr.  Chandler  sought  it,  and  lo  !  it 
was  not  there.  But  he  found,  however,  that,  in  1589, 
one  year  later,  Whitgift  said  in  his  reply  to  the  calum- 
nies of  Martin  Mar-prelate,  that,  ^*  he  was  persuaded 

*  Dr.  Bowden  refers  to  Burnet's  Hist.  lib.  iii.  p.  323,  et  seq. — and 
to  Collier's  Ecclesiastical  Hist.  Col.  records,  No.  Ixix.  p.  50,  et  soq. 
See  also  Bowden,  vol.  iii.  p.  325.  et  seq.  We  need  not  ask  e 
stronger  testimony  to  Episcopacy  than  the  extract  given  by  the 
Reviewer  from  the  king's  book.  The  ikree  orders  are  distinctly 
mentioned. 


48 

th6re  ought  to  be,  by  the  Word  of  God,  a  supel'ioiity 
among  the  ministers  of  the  church  ;  and  that  it  was 
sufficiently  proved  in  his  own  book  agiinst  Cartwright. 
And  that  he  was  at  all  times  ready  to  justify  it  by  the 
Holy  scripturesj  and  by  the  testimony  of  all  antiquity. 
This  clearly  shows  that  Whitgift  did  not  merely  wish 
but  believed  Bancroft's  doctrine  to  be  true."*  And  yet 
he  is  here  speaking  of  the  same  book  from  which  an 
extract  is  given  in  a  note  to  the  llevie\Yi  He  was  con- 
tending against  the  notion  early  adopted  by  the  Puritans, 
that,  "  God  had  given  in  the  scripture^,  a  complete  aiul 
unchangeable  form,  both  for  church  and  state  govern- 
ment ;"  and  the  utmost  of  his  meaning,  in  the  Reviewers 
quotation,  is,  that  there  is  not  in  scripture  any  such  de- 
tailed and  prescribed  system.  Else  how  are  we  to  un- 
derstand his  own  opinion,  above  expressed,  of  his  own 
book  ?  And  how  shall  we  understand  the  following 
expressions,  which  occur  in  his  letter  to  Beza  ;  (1593) 
<^  We  make  no  doubt  that  the  Episcopal  degree  which 
we  bear  is  an  institution  apostolical  and  divine  ;  and  so 
hath  always  been  held,  by  a  continual  course  of  times, 
from  the  apostles'  to  this  very  age  of  ours."  Again  ; 
*^  What  Aaron  was  to  his  sons,  and  to  the  Levites,  this 
the  bishops  were  to  the  priests  and  deacons  ;  and  so 
esteemed  of  the  fathers  to  be   by  divine  institution.'^j 

*  Chandler's  Appeal  defended,  p.  37,  as  quoted  by  Bowden,  vol. 
ii.  p.  101.  The  truth,  as  it  regards  Bishop  Bancroft,  seems  to  be, 
that  he  was  the  first  protestant  divine,  of  whom  we  iiave  informa- 
tion that  he  preached  publicly  the  doctrine  referred  to.  The  Re- 
viewer appears  to  have  substituted  started  (or  preached.  Hence  the 
error. 

t  Strype's  life  of  Whitgift,  pp.  350,  460.  Quoted  in  How's  let- 
ters to  Miller. 


49 

Both  these  extracts  are  taken  from  the  same  volume  to 
which  the  Reviewer  refers  for  the  extract  which  he 
has  adduced  to  support  his  own  opinion.  Had  he  no 
knowledge  of  them  ?  If  lie  had,  can  he  feel  justified  in 
endeavouring  to  represent  as  Whitgift's  opinion,  what 
he  must  have  known  not  to  have  been  his  ?  These 
testimonies  are  explicit  and  cannot  be  evaded  ;  and  the 
Reviewer's  extract  must  be  interpreted  in  consistency 
with  them.  It  was  sixteen  years  after  the  publication 
of  Whitgift's  reply  to  Cartvvright,  that  Bancroft's  ser- 
mon was  preached. 

Archbishop  Usher   neither  denied  nor  doubted  the 

distinction  between  bishop  and   priest.     He  professed 

to  deduce  Episcopacy  from  the  apostles  ;  and  though 

lie  contended  for  the  distinction  of  the  schoolmen,  that 

the   difference  was  in  degree^  and  not  in  order,  yet  he 

certainly  admitted  that  where   ordination  by  bishops 

could  be  obtained,  that  by  presbyters  was  invalid.* 

Bishop  Burnet  in  his   Exposition  of  the   Thirty-nine 

Articles,  says  "  Christ  appointed  a  succession  of  pastors, 

in  different  ranks,  to  be  continued  in  his  church  for  the 

work  of  the  gospel,  and  as   the  apostles   settled    the 

churches,   they  appointed  different  orders  of  bishops, 

priests  and   deacons.^f      What  credit  then  shall  be 

given  to  the  assertion  so  boldly  made  by  the  Reviewer, 

[that  these  divines  ^^  either  denied  or  doubted  the  dis- 

I  tinction  between  the  orders   of  bishop  and  priest  ?" 

i  Or  what  regard  shall  be  paid  to  the  sweeping  clause 

I  with  which   he   includes  ^^  most  of  the  learned    and 

[moderate  reformers,"  as  collectively  publishing  to   the 

*  Bowden,  vol,  ii.  p.  112. 
t  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  p.  119. 
7 


50 

world,  what,  individually,  they  either  doubted  or  de- 
nied ?  These  statements  are  extremely  well  fitted  for 
circulation  among  men  who  have  little  acquaintance 
with,  or  have  prejudices  against,  the  Episcopal  church  ; 
but  they  ill  become  men,  who  openly  boast  of  their 
talents  and  learning ;  and  they  certainly  are  but  bad 
specimens  of  ^*  uncorrupt  Christianity." 

The  Reviewer  considers  it  '^^  very  remarkable  that  in 
the  very  articles  of  that  church  which  now  asserts  (as 
if  it  was  a  novelty  !)  tliis  distinction  of  orders  to  be  vital 
to  its  constitution,  the  distiiictiou  is  entirely  overlooked, 
in  that  part  which  treats  of  the  institution  of  ministers 
to  their  office  ;  so  doubtful  a  thing  was  the  existing  or- 
ganization thought  to  be.''  Now  will  it  not  be  sup- 
posed, from  this  remark,  either  that  the  church  in  her 
public  formularies  has  said  nothing  on  the  subject  of 
orders,  but  what  is  contained  in  this  article,  or  that  the 
Keviewer  was  desirous,  at  least,  it  should  be  so  consider- 
ed? That  the  first  is  not  the  true  case  will  now  be 
shown  ;  our  readers  Avill  form  their  own  opinion  as  to 
the  last.  The  thirty-sixth  article  of  the  church  says — 
"  The  book  of  consecration  of  bishops,  and  ordering 
of  jJriests  and  deacons,  set  forth  by  the  General  Con- 
vention of  this  church  in  1792,  doth  contain  all  things 
necessary  to  such  consecration  and  ordering  ;  neither 
hath  it  any  thing  that  of  itself  is  superstitious  and  un- 
godly ;  and  therefore  whosoever  are  consecrated  or  or- 
dered according  to  said  form,  we  decree  all  such  to  be 
rightly,  orderly  and  lawfully  consecrated,  and  ordered.'** 

*  The  36th  Article  of  the  Church  of  England,    from  which  the 
American  is  taken  with  such  modifications  as  were  rendered  ne- 


51 

From  the  ordinal,  we  liave  already  given  some  extracla 
Mhich  relate  to  this  point,  and  we  now  give  anotlier ; — 
''  To  tlie  intent  that  these  orders  may  he  continued,  and 
reverently  used  and  esteemed  in  this  church,  no  man 
shall  he  accounted  or  taken  to  he  a  lawful  hisliop,  priest, 
or  deacon  in  this  ciiurch,  or  suffered  to  execute  any  of 
the  said  functions,  except  he  he  called,  tried,  examin- 
ed, and  admitted  thereunto,  according  to  the  form 
hereafter  following  ;  or  hath  had  Episcopal  consecration 
or  ordination."  Prpface.  The  twenty-third  article, 
to  v»  hicli  the  Reviewer  refers,  simply  declares,  as  will 
be  apparent  to  those  who  peruse  it, — that  no  man  ouglit 
to  take  ou  himself  the  ministry  ;  on  the  contrary,  those 
ouglit  to  be  received  as  such  who  are  appointed  by  men 
having  authority  therefor.  Who  has  that  authority  ? 
How  are  we  to  know  Avhen  men   are  lawfully  sent  ? 

ces?ary  by  the  change  of  our  pohtical  condition,  runs  thus : — "  The 
Book  of  Consecration  of  [Archbishops  and]  Bishops,  and  ordering 
of  priests  and  deacons,  [lately]  set  forth  [in  the  time  of  Edward  the 
sixth,  and  confirmed  at  the  same  time  by  authority  of  Parliament] 
doth  contain,  Lc. 

"  And  therefore  whosoever  are  consecrated  [and]  ordered  ac- 
cording to  [the  rites  of  that  book  since  the  second  year  of  the 
aforenamed  king  Edward  unto  this  time,  or  hereafter  shall  be  con- 
secrated or  ordered  according  to  the  same  rites,]  we  decree,  &c. 

We  have  subjoined  the  English  Article,  including  in  brackets 
the  parts  altered    or    omitted   in  ours,  in  order  to  give   the   Re^ 

I  viewer's  argument  all  the  force  it  can  receive.  Not  even  the 
Reviewer  will  suppose  that  the  American  Episcopal   Church  in-r 

I  tended  to  overlook  the  distinction  of  orders,  as  a  doubtful  organiza- 
tion. His  whole  argument  therefore  rests  upon  the  supposed  inten- 
tion of  the  original  framers  nftlie  Articles,  or  of  the  Convocatiou 
inl5G2. 


52 

When  tliey  are  consecrated  bisliops,  and  ordained 
priests,  or  deacons, — according  to  the  ordinal,— says 
the  thirty-sixth  article :  and  till  tliat  is  done,  or  they 
have  had  Episcopal  ordination, — says  the  preface  to  the 
ordinal, — they  shall  not  be  snffered  to  execute  the 
functions  of  the  ministry  in  this  church.  Will  it  be 
said,  that  if  this  is  the  doctrine  of  the  church  it  ought 
to  be  stated  fully  in  the  twenty-third,  or  any  other  arti- 
cle ?  Where  is  the  necessity  for  this  ?  Is  not  the  ordi- 
nal substantially  a  part  of  the  thirty-sixth  ?  Or  is  it  not 
as  fully  the  doctrine  of  the  church  ?  The  Reviewer, 
however,  would  have  it  supposed  that  the  church  is 
studiously  indistinct  on  this  point,  and  yet,  when  the 
odious  sin  of  Calvinism  is  to  be  fixed  upon  her,  in  de- 
fiance of  the  opinions  of  multitudes  of  lier  learned 
divines,  oh  then  !  her  language  is  "  studied  jyrecision/^ 
■ — and  if  this  is  disallowed, — ^^  it  will  be  difficult  to 
prove  any  thing  by  human  testimony."  Hoav  abundant 
is  that  liberality,  which  finds  us  forever  in  the  wrong; 
which  charges  us  "  with  shutting  our  eyes  upon  what? 
ever  learning  and  piety  may  do  to  illustrate  certain 
obscurities  in  the  religious  system,"  and  which  will  not 
allow  us  even  to  understand  the  principles  to  which  we 
have  solemnly  promised  to  conform,  but  would  hold  us 
up  to  the  world  as  blind  leaders  of  the  blind, — as  de- 
ceiving and  being  deceived. 

The  Reviewer  in  his  zeal  against  Episcopacy  forgets 
his  prudence.  He  tells  us  on  one  page,  that  the  divine 
right  was  first  started  by  Bancroft  in  1588,  and  yet  on 
the  next  he  quotes  Henderson  as  saying  in  the  name 
of  the  clergy  of  Britain,  in  1646,  fifty-eight  years 
later,  that  it  "  was  not  pleaded  till  of  late  by  somefeu\^^ 


53 

Henderson,— if  we  are  not  mistaken, — was  a  jpresby- 
terian  minister  of  Scotland,  and  ntterly  destitnte,  as 
we  believe,  of  any  authority  to  speak  in  tlie  name  of 
the  clergy  of  Britain.  Hume  calls  him  a  popular  and 
intriguing  preacher.  He  was  one  of  the  commission' 
ers  sent  up  from  Scotland  to  Charles  I.  at  Oxford,  to 
press  him  to  an  admission  of  their  principles.  At  this 
time  he  cautiously  shunned  a  conference  with  the  divines 
of  Oxford  on  this  same  point.*-  Besides,  the  assertion 
does  not  appear  to  be  true.  We  have  shown  that  the 
reformers  themselves  held  the  doctrine,  though,  per- 
haps they  did  not  publickly  "  plead"  or  defend  it.  In 
that  same  year  (1646) — that  memorable  year — "  the 
hierarchy,'* — says  the  lleviewer, — "was  abolished  by 
act  of  Parliament,  the  same  authority  by  which  it  is 
now  upheld. '*-^Here  we  must  lay  down  our  pen,  and 
pause  to  recover  our  abused  patience. 

Is  it  for  the  purpose  not  merely  of  exciting  against 
the  church,  the  opposition  of  principle,  but  to  render  it 
odious,  he  so  constantly  exhibits  to  his  readers  the 
calumny  that  its  ministry  was,  and  is  ?LCii\?d\y  founded 
on  the  government  of  England  ? — that  he  labours  at 
every  possible  opportunity  to  sliow  its  dependence  upon 
that  government  ?  Is  his  mind  too  dull  to  discriminate 
between  the  things  which  are  Caesar's,  and  the  things 
which  are  God's  ?  When  he  says  ^'  the  hierarchy  was 
abolished  by  act  of  Parliament,"  does  he  mean  that  the 
Pailiament  took  away  the  spiritual  power  of  the 
bishops  ? — that  it  took  away  from  them  tlieii-  inherent 
right  to  ordain  and  govern  in  the  church  ?     He  certaiu- 

*  Hume's  History  of  England.  Pali:,  eil  vol.  vi.  p.  38. 


54 

ly  must  knowj  that  the  Parliament  never  had,  and  never 
pretended  to  have,  any  such  power ;  of  course,  tliat  they 
never  exercised,  or  pretended  to  exercise,  such  poMer; 
except,  perhaps,  when  the  "  godly"^  and  ^'  well-affected^^ 
Independents  formed  its  majority.  The  only  power 
which  it  possessed,  and  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  the 
only  power  which  it  could  possess,  was  that  of  depriving 
the  bishops  of  their  revenues,  and  of  their  temporal 
jurisdiction.  That  is,  tliey  threatened  them  witli  the 
power  of  the  secular  arm,  (no  trifling  menace,  when  we 
consider  what  spirit  nerved  it,)  if  they  dared  to  exercise 
it.  But  does  the  Reviewer  believe  that  if  tlie  General 
Court  of  Massachusetts — (we  allude  not  now  to  what 
has  been  J  should  abolish  Episcopacy  from  the  state, 
and  prohibit  its  ministers  from  officiating,  that  they 
would  thereby  be  deprived  of  their  ministerial  character? 
The  case  is  applicable,  and  if  he  does  not  see  it  so,  it 
is  from  his  liabit  of  thinking  that  spiritual  poAver  is 
derived  from  the  people,  and  not  from  Clirist.  Docs 
lie  believe  that  either  the  English  parliament,  or  the 
Englisli  church,  deny  the  validity  of  the  orders  of  the 
American  bishops,  and  tlicir  ability  to  exercise  the  au- 
thority of  those  orders?  And  yet  what  have  those 
bishops  to  do  with  the  English  parliament,  church,  or 
king  ?  Has  the  Reviewer  never  heard  of  the  Episco- 
pal church  of  Scotland  ?  Is  he  ignorant  that  though 
the  bishops  of  that  church,  were,  at  the  Revolution,  de- 
prived of  every  thing  connected  with  their  office,  which 
the  civil  power  could  take  from  them,  yet  they  continued 
to  exercise  their  spiritual  functions  in  the  very  face  of 
penal  laws  made  against  them,  in  consequence  of  their 
adherence  to   the  fallen  house  of  Stuart  ?      "  They 


55 

lost,'' — says  Skinner, — ^*  their  revenues,  and  temporal 
jurisdiction ^hwi  their  spiritual  authority  still  remained  ; 
and  that  ^  gift  of  God/  ^vhich  they  had  received  by 
tlie  imposition  of  Episcopal  hands,  they  considered 
themselves  bound  to  exercise,  for  promoting  that  Episco- 
pal Avork  in  the  church  of  God,  which  had  been  com- 
mitted to  them.  By  virtue  of  tliis  commission,  they 
continued  in  a  quiet  manner,  to  discharge  the  duties  of 
their  spiritual  function.  They  ordained  ministers  for 
such  vacant  congregations  as  adhered  to  their  commun- 
ion, and  when  they  saw  it  necessary  to  attend  to  the 
preservation  of  their  own  order,  they  proceeded  to  the 
consecration  of  such  persons  as  were  thought  most 
proper  for  being  invested  Avith  that  sacred  and  impor- 
tant trust,  without  asking  permission  either  from  the 
exiled  or  reigning  prince."  When  in  1792  they  ap- 
plied to  the  British  parliament  for  a  repeal  of  the  laws 
against  them,  Bishop  Horsely  said  of  them,  that, 
^'  losing  all  their  political  capacity,  they  retained,  how- 
ever, the  authority  of  the  pure  spiritual  Episcopacy 
within  the  church  itself  ;"  and  the  v.hole  bench  of 
English  bishops  unanimously  opposed  the  passing  of  aii 
act  which  seemed  to  infringe  tlie  validity  of  the  Scotch 
Episcopal  orders.  The  laws  against  that  church  were 
repealed,  and  though,  even  now,  she  has  no  connection 
with  the  state,  she  still  preserves  her  pure  Episcopacy, 
and  holds  up  her  head  as  a  distinguished  and  venerable 
branch  of  the  church  of  Christ.*     Many  of  the  most 

*  Skinner's  Primitive  Truth,  pp.  2G5 — 289.  See  also  R.  Adam's 
Relig.  World  displayed,  vol.  ii.  p.  411.  Prideaux's  Connections, 
Charlestoivn  ed.  vol.  iii.  p.  222.     Aud  above  note  on  page  43. 


56 

distinguished  laity  of  the  kingdom, — says  Adam, — • 
have  since  entered  her  communion  ; — sev  cral  clergy- 
men ordained  by  English  bishops  have  entered  her 
service,  and  one  of  them  has  been  raised  to  the  Episco- 
pate.f  When  Episcopacy  was  abolished  in  Scotland, 
the  presbyterian  government  was  established  as  its  sub- 
stitute :  has  any  one,  whether  in  ^^  presbyterian  fetters" 
or  out  of  them,  ever  pretended  that  presbyterianism  was 
therefore  founded  on  the  English  government  ?  Was 
it  the  case  with  Congregationalism  in  New-England's 
early  day  ;  a  time  when  no  church  could  be  formed 
without  permision  from  tlie  civil  magistrate  ?  Or  must 
we  remind  the  Heviewer  of  the  adage,  which  teaches 
incautious  persons  to  beware  of  casting  stones? 

But  the  hierarchy  was  abolished.  In  one  sense  we 
admit  it  was.  The  bishops  were  deprived  of  their 
revenues,  forbidden  to  execute  their  office,  and  driven 

t  In  Edinburgh,  the  literary  metropolis  of  Britain,  "  from  what- 
ever cause,  the  Episcopal  party  is  evidently  increasing*  in  numbers., 
personal  consideration  and  resources."  Christian  Observer^  vol.  xviii. 
p.  644.  "  The  Scotch  Episcopal  Church,  can  produce  a  very  re- 
spectable list  of  learned  names," — says  Adam  (vol.  ii.  pp.  444-5) 
"  notwithstanding  her  fluctuating  fortune,  and  under  all  the  disad- 
vantages arising  from  her  frequently  depressed  condition."  Among 
her  modern  writers  may  be  mentioned  the  elder  Skinner,  author  of 
an  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Scotland  in  two  volumes,  and  "  one  of 
the  best  Latin  poets  that  Scotland  can  boast  since  the  days  of 
Buchanan," — Bishop  Skinner,  son  to  the  former,  and  author  of  the 
work  in  reply  to  Dr.  Campbell,  entitled  Primitive  Truth,  &c.  which 
we  have  frequently  quoted, — Dr.  Alison,  author  of  some  volumes 
of  Sermons,  and  of  a  work  on  Taste, — and  among  her  laity,  Sir 
William  Forbes,  author  of  the  life  of  Dr.  Beattie,  &c. 


57 

into  exile.*  It  was  the  victory  of  men  of  sanguinary 
minds  and  blood-stained  hands.  "  Thus  was  christian 
liberty  recovered  for  a  little  season  in  England." 

The  rieviewer  does  not  say  expressly^  for  he,  proba- 
bly, had  his  doubts,  but  he  leaves  his  readers  to  imply 
that  the  Waldenses,  a  sect,  which  existed  in  Piedmont, 
were  not  Episcopalians.  They  were  not  only  such, 
but  they  were  the  earliest  protestant  Episcopalians  of 
Avhora  we  have  any  account.  Tliey  date  their  origin 
as  a  sect  in  the  time  of  Sylvester,  Bishop  of  Rome, 
A.  D.  316,  and  they  were  certainly  known  to  exist 
as  early  as  the  latter  part  of  the  seventh  century.  Dr. 
Mosheim,  who  is  by  presbyterians  and  congregational- 
ists  in  general,  allowed  to  be  a  correct,  as  well  as  candid 
writer,  and  who  was  not  himself  an  Episcopalian,  says 
expressly, — ^"  that  the  government  of  the  church,  was 
committed  by  the  Waldenses  to  bishops,  priests,  and 
deacons,  for  they  acknowledged  that  these  three  eccle- 
siastical orders  were  instituted  by  Christ  himself.''f 
Our  readers  will  doubtless  be  satisfied  with  this  declara- 
tion, but  if  not,  we  refer  them  to  Dr.  Bowden's  Letters 
to  Dr.  Miller,  vol.  ii.  p.  77,  et  seq,  and  vol.  iii.  p.  331, 
et  seq.  v/here  as  we  think,  the  question  is  put  to  rest 
forever.  The  Moravian  Church  is  acknowledged  on 
all  hands  to  be  Episcopal,  and  it  was  from  the  bishops 
of  the  Waldenses  that  the  Moravians  first  received  the 

*  Nine  of  the  English  bishops  were"  providentially  preserved," 
and  returning  at  the  time  of  the  restoration  of  the  king,  were  re- 
instated in  their  former  dioceses,  except  Dr.  Juxon,  who  was  ap- 
pointed to  Canterbury, — the  vacant  dioceses  were  soon  filled,  and 
the  church  re-established.    Adam,  vol  ii.  p.  409.    Skinner,  p.  264. 

*Eccles.  Hist.  vol.  iii,  p.  120 
8 


58 

Eipiscopacy.  The  labours  of  tills  Imiiible  branch  of 
the  church,  the  missions  she  has  established  in  Green- 
land, in  South  Africa,  in  tlie  West  Indies,  aud  on  the 
borders  of  our  own  country,  cannot  be  unknown  to  our 
readers.  Many  of  iier  missionaries  are  unlearned  and 
simple  men,  but,  with  a  self-denial  approaching  to 
martyrdom,  they  have  carried  the  light  of  truth  to 
regions  where  the  religion  of  the  cross,  and  almost  all 
the  charities  of  life  were  unknown.  God  has  blessed 
their  labours  : — may  he  still  continue  to  bless  them. 

Our  readers  can  now  judge,  with  what  force  of  rea- 
soning, accurate  learning,  and  copious  proofs,  the  ad- 
vocates of  Episcopacy  were  to  be  driven  from  all  their 
positions.     We  have  little  doubt  of  the  issue. 

But  another  question  occurs.  The  Reviewer,  sup- 
posing  he  has  displaced  Episcopacy  from  the  ground 
of  divine  institution,  goes,  at  some  length,  into  the  ques- 
tion of  expedieyicy.  Now  with  this  question,  we,  as 
members  of  the  church  have,  literally,  nothing  to  do. 
We  have  shown  that  its  divine  institution,  is  the 
doctrine  of  the  churcii, — was  the  belief  of  the  reformers, 
and  of  the  fathers, — and  that  Episcopacy  is  plainly  to 
be  found  on  the  pages  of  Holy  Scripture  itself.  AYe 
see  then  no  necessity  for  discussing  it  on  humbler  pre- 
tensions. (Questions  of  mere  expediency  stretch  them- 
selves over  a  wide  extent  of  ground,  and  very  generally 
terminate  at  the  same  point  at  whlcli  the  discussion  ; 
commenced.  The  speculator  exhau-«ts  himself,  and  in 
vain,  for  he  finds,  at  last,  he  has  done  little,  or  nothing, 
towards  conviction.  Such  is  the  structure  of  the  human 
mind,  that  whatever  subject  may  be  left  open  for  opin- 
ion, will  create  variance.     Let  us  reason  then  as  we 


59 

may  ou  this  question,  destitute,  as  wc  are,  of  any  fixed 
and  acknowled^^ed  principles,  from  which  to  draw  con- 
clusions, we  should  never  ])ring  it  to  an  end.  We  con- 
sider the  true  question  to  be  a  question  of  fact.  We 
would  not  remove  it  from  its  hallowed  base.  Its  long 
and  almo.it  uniform  existence,  contrasted  with  tlie. 
variable  nature  of  all  other  systems,  is  enough  on  tlie 
score  of  expediency. 

We  cannot,  however,  lightly  pass  over,  every  thing 
the  Reviewer  has  mifjgled  with  his  speculations.  He 
is  frequently  at  war  with  fact,  and  we  must  expose  him. 
He  represpnis  as  barely  acquiescing  in  Episcopacy,  and 
of  course  denying  its  divine  institution,  "  the  best  of  the 
early  reformers,  and  the  most  judicious  writers  of  later 
times.''  Our  readers  have  seen  what  dependence  is 
to  be  placed  on  his  representations  of  the  opinions  of 
the  reformers,  and  his  cxamj)lcs  of  the  most  judicious 
writers  of  later  times,  as  will  be  shown,  are  not  much 
more  to  his  purpose.  Bishop  Sanderson,  writing  upon 
this  subject,  says,— •'^  besides  that  it  is  clear  from  evi- 
dent texts  of  scripture,  and  from  the  testimony  of  as 
ancient  and  authentic  records,  as  the  world  hath  any  to 
show,  for  the  attesting  of  any  other  part  of  the  estab- 
lished doctrine  of  the  church  of  England  ;  so  it  is  evi- 
dently deduced  out  of  sundry  passages  in  the  book  of 
consecration  (ordinal)  and  hath  been  constantly  and 
uniformly  maintained  by  our  best  writers  and  by  all 
the  sober,  orderly,  and  orthodox  sons  of  the  church."* 
T!je  Reviewer  calls  to  his  aid  tlie  names  of  Sir.  p. 
King,  Ciiillingworth,  Hor.'.liy,  Hammond,   Prettymau, 

*  Quoted  l»y  Bowdcn,  vol.  ii.  p.  127. 


60 

Locke  and    Paley.      Sir  P.  ICing  we  consider  too 
doubtful  to  be  any  support  to  his  cause.     He  wrote  his 
"  Enquiry"  at  twenty-two,  from  an  ardent  and  lauda- 
ble desire  to  still  the  religious  djssentions  of  his  country ; 
it  was  refuted  by  Slater ;: — it  is  variously  said,  that  he 
acknoAvledged  the  refutation  ;  and  it  is  certain,  that, 
when  he  became  Lord  Chancellor  he  preferred  Slater 
in  the  church.     These  things  have  often  been  stated  in 
church  controversy,  and  never  yet  denied.*    It  is  not  a 
little  remarkable,  that  the  very  writers  who  exclaim  so 
loudly  against  the  use  of  the  ancient  fathers,  can  have 
so  ready  recourse  to  the  work  of  this   author,  made  up 
of  garbled  extracts  from  these  very  fathers,  and  of  rea- 
soning, inconclusive,  because  built  upon  those  extracts,  ! 
Chillingworth   wrote   a  treatise  to    demonstrate    the 
apostolic  institution  of  Episcopacy,  and  we  have  already 
exhibited  an    extract  from  that  treatise,   which,   one 
would  think,  was  plain  enough  on  this  poiut.     Pretty- 
man  (now  TomlineJ  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  on  the  twenty- 
third  article,  after  a  long  detail  of  authorities  from  the 
New  Testament  and  early  fathers,  says,-r-"  It  seems 
therefore  as  clear  as  written  testimony  can  make  it  that 
Bishops  were  appointed  by  the  apostles  ;  that  there 
were  three  distinct  orders  of  ministers,  namely,  bishops, 
priests  and  deacons  in  the  primitive  church ;  and  that 
there  has  been  a  regular  succession  of  Bishops  from  the 
apostolic  age  to  the  present,  and  we  may  safely  chal- 
lenge the  enemies  of  Episcopacy  to  produce  evidence  of 
a  single  ancient,   independent  church  which  was  not 
governed  by  a  Bishop."     Hammond,  speaking  of  the 

*  Adam's  Relig.  World,  vol.  ii.  p.  292.— Skinner's  Prim.  Truth, 
p.  164.  n0te.     Bowden,  vol.  ii.  p.  121. 


61 

powers  given  to  the  apostles  by  tlie  Holy  Ghost,  says, 
"  4thly,  to  ordain  others,  and  to  commit  the  same  powers 
to  those  which  the  Holy  Ghost  had  settled  in  themselves, 
and  so  to  provide  a  ministry  of  his  holy,  celestial  call- 
ing, fsent  by  Christy  as  he  was  by  the  Father,  John 
XX.  21.)  to  continue  by  succession  to  the  end  of  the 
world.'''*  By  what  fatality  could  the  Reviev/er  have 
quoted  such  a  writer  as  opposed  to  the  divine  institution 
of  the  ministry  ?  Even  Dr.  Miller  says  of  him,  that 
he  was,  ^'^  perhaps  the  ablest  advocate  of  prelacy  that 
ever  lived."  Hoadhfs  opinion  was  not  always  such  as 
in  the  Bangorian  controversy.  In  his  Reasonableness 
of  Conformity,  (p.  4.)  he  has  left  behind  him  the  fol- 
lowing testimony, — "  We  think  w^c  can  demonstrate 
that  in  the  primitive  times,  the  administration  of  eccle- 
siastical affairs  was  in  the  hands  of  bishops,  who  had 
presbyters  subject  to  them.  That  as  the  apostles  main- 
tained a  superiority  over  the  presbyters  of  the  churches 
they  constituted,  so  upon  occasion  of  their  absence  they 
settled  others  in  that  superiority.  That  as  these  suc- 
ceeding the  apostles  had  the  power  of  ordination  com- 
mitted to  them,  &c."  In  another  place  speaking  of  the 
universal  concurrence  of  "  every  one  who  speaks  of  the 
government  of  the  church  in  any  place,'^  he  says,  "  from 
"which  testimonies  I  cannot  but  think  it  highly  reason- 
able to  infer  that  Episcopacy  was  of  apostolic  institu- 
tion.''! Was  it  perfectly  fair  then  that  the  Reviewer 
should  claim  these  ^'judicious  writers"  as  merely  acquies- 
Qing  in  Episcopacy  ?  We  think  not.     Fuley  and  Locke 

*  Practical  CaU;rbigm  ;  London  ed.  lG77,p.  311. 
t  Quoted  by  Bowden,  vol.  iii.  p.  IGI.     See  also  the  same  wiiter, 
vol.  i.  p.  303,  and  vol.  ii.  p.  276. 


62 

we  suppose  we  must  yield  to  him.  Eot  then  what  a 
powerful  host  of  great  names  mi,2;ht  we  throw  into  the 
opposite  scale.  Bacon, Hooker,  Andrews,  Hall;,  Leslie, 
Law,  Taylor,  Home,  Jones,  Horseley  andimnimerable 
others  who  shone  as  lights  of  the  intellectual  and  moral 
world  ?  If  numbers  availed,  the  question  might  soon 
be  decided,  for,  ^^  the  church  of  England  hath  constant 
ly  iusi^ted," — says  Mosheim, — "^  on  the  divine  origin 
of  its  government  and  discipline/'* 

The  presumption  of  the  lleviewer,  with  regard  to  the 
opinions  of  the  mass  of  churchmen  in  this  country  is 
indeed ^?*oss  presumption,  and  sufficiently  proves  upon 
what  inconclusive  ground  he  is  disposed  to  rest. 

In  the  course  of  his  remarks,  tlie  Reviewer  brings 
forward  a  very  serious  charge,  which,  before  he  ven- 
tured to  put  it  upon  paper,  he  should  have  been  well 
satisfied  was  fully  true.  But  it  is  not  true  :  and  it  is 
one  of  the  lightest  expressions  which  can  be  bestowed 
on  his  conduct,  cither  that  he  Avas  ignorant  of  the  sub- 
ject, or  that  he  was  careless  as  to  faci^,  provided  a 
strong  case  be  made  out  against  the  Episcopal  church. 
In  dealing  with  such  an  enemy  our  forbearance  is 
greatly  put  to  task.  We  arc  prepared  to  bear  much, — 
to  witness  much  misrepresentation, — to  read  many 
strange  tales. — but  we  must  be  expected  to  feel  in  some 
manner,  when  our  enemies  cast  off  principle,  that  they 
may  accuse  us  of  a  want  of  it.  The  Reviewer  says,— 
"  We  believe  we  may  say  without  contradiction  that  in 
no  other  denomination  is  discipline  in  so  low  a  state. — 
We  speak  of  evils  belonging  to  the  system. — We  speak 
of  the  control  over  communicants,  the  only  spiritual 

*  Ecclcs.  Hist.  vol.  ii.  p.  231. 


C3 

authority  now  exercised. — Instead  of  a  good  life  aud 
conversation,  t!je  condition  of  sharing  in  the  most  sacred 
act  of  clni.^jtian  fellowship  set  forth  in  the  formularies 
of  a  sect  which  defines  the  church  to  be  ^  a  congregation 
of  faithful  men,'  is  his  ability  to  repeat  the  creed,  the 
Lord's  prayer,  and  the  ten  commandments,  and  to  an- 
swer such  other  (|uestions  as  in  the  short  catechism  are 
contained.  A  candidate  who  can  stand  this  ordeal  has 
?i  right  to  confirmation  by  t!;c  bishop,  and  the  jiviest  is 
Halle  io  ecccGiiiuinnication  if  after  this  he  refuse  him  the 
elements.*'  AVith  (.hurchmen,  this  statement  will  re- 
quire no  explanation,  for  they  will  at  once  see  \\o\y  false 
it  is  :  but  it  is  calculated,  as  ^vc  have  said  of  some  of 
his  fcrmcr  statcjnents,  to  impose  en  others.  Now,  what 
is  the  fact  ?  All  baptized  persons  are  required  to  pre- 
sent themselves  to  the  bishop  for  two  purposes,  that  they 
may  ratify  and  confirm  the  ( ouditions  of  faith  and  re- 
pentance upon  which  they  had  been  baptized,  and  that 
tlie  bishop  may  ratify  and  confirm  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands  the  act  of  baptism  performed  by  an  inferior 
minister  whose  authority  is  derived  from  him.  A  dis 
cretiouary  power  is  by  the  rubric  vested  in  the  minister 
of  every  parish,  for  preveiiiiug  uniii;,  or  improper  persons, 
from  being  imposed  on  the  bishop,  and,  questionless,  on 
all  such  occasions,  he  should  use  that  power.  And  ^*  to 
the  end  that  confirmation  may  be  administered  to  the 
more  edifying  of  such  as  sh-ili  receive  it,  the  cluirch 
hath  thought  good  to  order,  that  110116  shall  he  confirmed 
hut  such  as  can  say  the  creed,  the  Lord's  prayer,  &c. 
which  order  is  very  convenient  to  be  observed,  to  the 
end,  that  children  having  now  come  to  years  of  discre- 
tion;  and  having  learned   what  their  Godfatiiers   and 


64 

1^0  dm  others  iiad  promised  for  tliem  in  baptism,  inay 
themselvp.s  tvitli  their  own  mouth  and  consent ^  ratifi/  and 
confirm  tha  same,  and  also  promise  that  by  the  grace 
of  God,  they  will  evermore  endeavor  themselves  faith- 
fully  to  observe  all  such  things  as  they,  by  their  own 
confession,  have  assented  unto.*'  Now  heie,  so  far 
from  giving  a  right,  to  all  who  can  say  the  creed,  &c.  of 
admission  to  confirmation,  the  object  is  to  prevent  from 
receiving  it  all  those  who  have  not  a  proper  understand- 
ing, of  the  baptismal  vow  or  covenant :  and  one  would 
think  with  regard  to  the  promise  required,  that  if  as- 
sumed in  sincerity,  it  must  have  a  near,  if  not  an  in- 
timate, connection  witli  "  a  good  life  and  conversa- 
tion." We  are  not  prepared  to  say,  however,  that 
this  ordinance  is  not  occasionally  abused,  that  children 
beneath  years  of  discretion,  are  not  sometimes,  made  its 
subjects,  and  that  the  vital  deficiency  of  sincerity  in  the 
promise,  is  not,  in  some  instances,  subsequently  ascer- 
tained. And  we  doubt  not,  that  impositions  of  this  na- 
ture have  sometimes  found  their  way  into  the  congrega- 
tions of  the  "  Boston  association  of  ministers,"  as  well 
as  into  other  congregations  based  upon  the  platforms  of 
New-England,  even  at  the  solemn  ^'  owning  of  the 
covenant."  We  question  the  ability  of  any  men  to  form^ 
an  inquisition  which  can  penetrate  to  the  heart,  and  ob- 
serve its  secret  workings  ;— we  know  not  how  many  ap- 
parently ^oo<Z  actions  may  have  originated  in  &a(Z motives; 
and  it  is  easy  to  be  seen,  that  tlie  popular  opinion,  even 
©f  good  men,  is  not  always  unanimous.  We  have  had 
some  experience  on  this  subject,  and  have  deeply  felt 
its  difficulties.  W^e  could  quote  one  of  the  "judicious 
Avriters,"  of  whom  the  Reviewer  has  spoken,  if  we  ha<i 


65 

loom,  to  this  purpose,  but  we  must  be  content  with  re- 
ferring our  readers  to  him.*  We  see, then  that  the 
rig'ht  is  not  sucli  as  the  Reviewer  represents,  but  that 
there  are  some  very  serious  checks,  sufficiently  strong, 
we  would  say,  for  one  "»  not  over  much  attached  to  nar- 
row conditions  of  admission  to  cliristian  privileges." 
But  the  chief  aim  of  the  Reviewer  is  at  the  communion 
discipline,  and  this,  it  is  obvious,  he  does  not,  or  will  not, 
understand.  A  rubric,  at  the  end  of  the  confirmation 
office,  sa^^s, — "  There  shall  none  be  admitted  to  the 
Holy  Communion  until  such  time  as  he  be  confirmed,  or 
be  ready  and  desirous  to  be  confirmed."  Would  any 
of  our  readers  from  such  a  rule  have  dvr^wn  the  opinion, 
that  all  confirmed  persons,  whatever  may  be  their  lives 
and  conversations,  should  have  necessarily  a  right  to 
the  Holy  Supper,  the  refusal  of  which  in  a  priest, 
should  render  him  liable  to  excommunication  P  Yet 
such  is  the  case  with  the  Reviewer,  for  there  is  not,  in 
all  the  offices  and  rubrics  of  the  church,  a  single  rule  to 
justify  this  preposterous  opinion.  The  following  rubrics 
are  for  the  government  of  the  clergy  in  this  respect. 
'^  If  among  those  who  come  to  be  partakers  of  the  Holy 
Communion,  the  Minister  shall  know  aiiij  to  be  an  open 
and  notorious  evil  liver,  or  to  have  done  any  WTong  to 
his  neighbours  by  word  or  deed,  so  that  the  Congregation 
be  thereby  offended;  he  shall  advertise  him,  that  he  pre- 
sume vMto  come  to  the  Lord's  Table  until  he  have  open- 
ly declared  himself  to  have  truly  repented,  and  amended 
bis  former  evil  life,  that  tlie  Congregation  may  thereby 
[)e  satisfied;  and  that  he  hath  recompensed  the  parties  to 

*  See  Hammond's  Practical  Catechism,  p.  393,  et  seq. 
9 


66 

whomliehath  clone  wrong;  oratleast  declare  himself  to  be] 
in  full  purpose  so  to  do^  as  soon  as  lie  conveniently  may. 
The  same  order  shall  the  Minister  use  with  those,  be-  ■ 
twixt  whom  he  perceiveth  malice  and  hatred  to  reign  ; 
not  suffering  them  to  be  partakers  of  the  Lord's  Table" 
until  he  know  them  to  be  reconciled,  &c."*'     How  much 
farther  would  this  rigid  disciplinarian  stretch  the  eccle- 
siastical power  ?     In  England,  for  tlie  Heviewer  carries 
us  thither  on  this  point  also,  these  rubrics  are  LaiVj  and 
are  as  much  a  rule  to  the  Judges  in  Westminster  Hall, 
as  to  the  Curate  of  a  parish. f 

The  Reviewer  next  lays  before  us  some  farther  specu- 
lations upon  the  possihilities  and  jJ^i'adventures  of  the 
Episcopal  system  ;  to  all  which  we  need  only  say  that 
most  of  them  are  amply  refuted  by  experience,  and  the 
rest  are  mere  conjectures  as  to  what  may  possibly  occur 
by  the  abuse  of  the  system.  "  We  are  not  of  those  who 
dream  of  perfection  in  tliis  world,"  to  use  the  language 
of  Gov.  Winthrop  ;  and  we  know  of  no  system  ad- 
ministered by  man  which  has  not  its  difficulties.  We 
think,  however,  that  Episcopacy  is  as  free  from  them  as 
any,  at  least,  which  its  opponents  have  been  able  to 
devise.  What  is  the  case  with  regard  to  congregational- 
ism  ?  Is  not  its  character  much  changed  from  the  firs! 
foundation  of  Robinson,  and  even  from  the  platforms  o 
Cambridge  and  Saybrook  ?     Is  there  at  present  a  per< 

*  See  also  Canon  xxv.  General  Convention,  and  Canon  iii.  1^17 
t  See  Sherlock  and  Horseley  on  the  Test  Acts. — The  Reviewei 
differs  we  suspect  from  Dr.  Priestley.  He  was  desirous  of  having 
the  Lord's  supper  administered  to  children. — Had  an  Episcopaliar 
proposed  this  hew  loud  would  have  been  the  shout, — a  Papist, 
Papiit. 


67 

feet  concord  among  its  adhereuts  inrej;ard  to  its  beauties 
md  defects?     Is  tkere  no  desire  for   alteration?     Is 
there  no  angry  opposition  to  tliat  desire  ?     Is  it  not  a  sys- 
tem, almost   to  a  proverb,   various,  and  disconnected, 
— transient  as  the  rainbow,  and,  like  it,  indescribable  ? 
[t  would  be  far  from  our  wishes  to  defend  all  the  details 
of  the  English  church,  connected  as  she  is  with  the  civil 
government  of  that  country.     We  are  no  friends  to  such 
an  union,  whether  the  Ecclesiastics  are,  as  in  England, 
^'  my  Lords  Bishops,''  or  as  in  New-England  formerly, 
'»'  my  Lords  Brethren."     Episcopacy  in  this  country 
must  rest  upon  its  intrinsic  merits,  and,  founded  as  it  is 
upon  primitive  and   apostolic  principles,   we  make  no 
question  of  its  being  Avell  adapted  to  its  object.     The 
Episcopate  may,  in  one  sense,  be  considered  a  desirable 
station,  for  it  is   evidently  one  of  respectability   and 
dignity,  but  it  certainly  calls  to  greater  trials,  responsi- 
bility, and  cares,  than  an  inferior  office,  and  one  of  the 
present  House  of  Bishops  has  even  quoted  the  observa- 
tion of  Bishop  Taylor,  that  ''  the  honour  does  not  pay 
the  burden  ;''  and  as  to  emoluments,  none,  deserving  the 
name,  are  in  any  instance  attached  to  it.     Of  the  re- 
spectability,  the  talents,  and  the  piety,  of  those  who 
now  fill  that  station  among  us,  we  believe  no  question 
will  be  made.     Several  of  them  are  learned,  and  all  of 
them  are  well  educated  and  well  informed  men. 
I     But  the  Reviewer  brings  us  back  again  to  the  divine 
right.     And   here  ice  must  rest  Episcopacy.     In  our 
jconsciences  we  believe  the  claim  to  be  just.     We  hope 
our  readers  are  prepared,  if  not  to  admit  it,  yet,  at  least, 
to  believe  it  a  point  deserving  iVill  examination.     Let 
them  enquire   then  into  its  evidences  ;  they  will  fip.d 


68 

tliem  copious  and  strong.  And  let  iliem  take  ^long 
with  tliein  this  reflection,  tliat  it  has  been  advocated, 
through  a  series  of  ages,  by  men  of  powerful  talents, 
of  unquestioned  erudition,  and  of  the  sinccrest  piety. 
Still  however,  let  us  not  be  misunderstood.  We  repeat 
that  by  the  divine  institution  of  Episcopacy,  we  mean 
the  establishment  of  three  orders  in  the  ministry, 
bishops,  priests  and  deacons,  by  the  Apostles,  acting  un- 
der the  plenitude  of  power,  given  them  by  our  Lord 
and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ. 

Our  attention  is  next  called  by  the  Reviev/er,  to  the 
consideration  of  forms  of  prayer  in  general,  as  intro- 
ductory to  some  "^  graver  charges  against  the  Episco- 
pal book  of  common  prayer."     He  does  not  deny  the 
lawfulness   of  set  forms  : — He  esteems  it  a  matter  of 
minor  importance,  whether  our  petitions  are  offered  up 
in  the  words  of  others  or  our  own  : — He  is  not  blind 
to  the  advantages,  or  defects,  of  either  of  the  different 
methods  adopted  in  congregations,   and  he  does  not  de- 
fend extemporaneous  prayer,  but  admits  that  there  are 
objections  to  it  which  we  have  been  accustomed  to  con- 
sider  both   strong  and  serious.     What  then  would  he 
liaye  ?     He  prefers  fi-ee  prayer  : — That  is,  he,  as  a 
leader  of  the  devotions  of  his  congregation,  shall  be  at 
liberty   to  pray  as  he  pleases  ; — that  he  may  to-day 
pray  without  any  form  at  all, — to-morrow  take   with 
liim  into  the  pulpit  an  outline,  or  skeleton,  to  wliich,  on 
the  impulse  of  the  moment,  he  may  give  dimensions  and 
stature,  and  the  next  day  '^^  read  prayers  to  God"  from 
a  form  of  his  own  compilingj  borrowed,  perhaps,  in 
no  trifling  measure  from  that  identical  book  of  common 
prayer^  which  he  would  have  his  readers  esteem  such  a 


69 

bugbear.  We  have  mixed,  somewhat,  in  our  earlier 
days,  among  those  who  reject  the  use  of  Liturgies,  and 
we  assure  our  readers,  that  we  have  frequently  dis- 
covered this  purloining  practice,  where  a  different  opin- 
ion is  considered  desirable.  We  are  inclined  to  think 
that  this  assumption  of  the  minister  to  act  his  own 
pleasure  in  every  respect,  in  so  important  a  transaction 
as  the  worship  of  Grod,  is  somewhat  ^'  papistical,"  if  not 
rather  on  the  worst  side  of  popery.*  Have  the  congre- 
gation really  nothing  to  do  in  worsliip,  but  to  listen  ? 
To  pretend  they  can  do  more,  under  these  circumstances, 
is,  to  our  view,  preposterous  ;  and  we  suspect  from  the 
manner  in  whicli  tne  Reviewer  treats  this  part  of  his 
subject,  that  his  own  convictions  lean  to  forms,  and  that 
whatever  he  may  write  against  them  for  popularity's 

*  The  following  extract  may  serve  to  amuse  th^  reader  : — a 
glance  of  the  eye  will  convince  him  where  it  is  applicable.  "  The 
laity  of  the  church  of  Scotland  lie  under  greater  hardships,  with 
respect  to  public  worship,  than  the  laity  of  any  church  on  earth. 
And  this  hardship  is  rendered  still  more  galling  to  those  who  have 
sense  enough  to  feel  it,  by  the  pompous  harangues  that  we  are 
frequently  entertained  with,  upon  the  privileges  that  we  possess 
above  other  Christians,  the  religious  lihertij  that  we  enjoy,  and 
the  singular  jmriUj  oi  OUT  worah-i^.  Sure,  gentlemen,  you  must 
mean  yourselves  Avhen  you  ascribe  these  great  blessings  to  our 
church,  or  you  insult  us  in  the  nlost  cruel  manner.  If  you  mean 
that  you  enjoy  great  privileges,  and  a  most  extensive  liberty,  it  is 
very  true,  for  ?/ou  pray  what  you  please,  t/o"  sing  what  you  please, 
you  teach  w  hat  you  please,  and  our  whole  public  worship  is  s« 
much  of  your  own  manufacture,  that  there  can  hardly  be  found 
room  for  a  verse  or  tv/o  of  scripture  ;  and  these  iiou  choose  a^ 
you  please.  In  a  wor.i,  every  parish  minister  is  a  little  pope."' 
Letter  to  ilia  elders  and  lainisier.--  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  bi/  n 
Blacksmith. 


70 

sake,  yet  he  is,  abilities  and  cultivation  out  of  the  ques- 
tion, often  constrained  to  use  them.  He  certainly  does 
not  venture  upon  any  tiling  that  deserves  the  name  of 
argument,  and  the  most  conspicuous  expressions  to  be 
found  in  the  six  or  eight  pages  he  has  covered  Avitli  his 
verbiage,  are  those  in  which  he  insinuates  that  set  forms 
are  useless  among  men,  who  (like  himself,  we  suppose) 
being  able  to  preach,  are,  of  course,  able  to  pray  ;  as  if 
he  did  not  know  that  the  most  bitter  opposition  to  forms 
of  prayer^  has  come,  almost  universally,  from  the  weak 
and  ignorant,  and  that  their  use  has  been  advocated  by 
the  most  able  talents  which  liistory  has  recorded.  He 
is,  certainly,  desirous  to  keep  /izwsf'//* unshackled,  how- 
ever much  his  course  of  proceeding mny  tend  to  shackle 
others.  Are  any  of  our  readers  disposed  to  believe 
that  they  may  safely  trust  the  management  of  their  wor- 
ship to  the  discretion  of  their  minister  ?  We  would  re- 
ply, though  the  remark  is  a  trite  one,  that  what  is  left  to 
the  discretion  of  the  minister  is  left  also  to  the  indiscre- 
tions and  the  jJussions  of  the  man ; — and  we  sometimes  at 
least  find  the  two  last,  where  the  first  only  was  looked 
for.*  But,  even  admitting  that  the  congregation  do  more 

*  We  are  familiar  with  an  instance  of  a  candidate  for  the  con- 
gregational ministry,  who  visiting,  during  his  probation,  one  of  our 
largest  cities,  attended  the  ministry  of  two  of  the  most  respeclabJe 
presbyterian  clergymen.  In  the  morning,  Dr.  — ,  an  advocate 
for  the  war^  used  in  relation  to  it,  in  praijcr,  words  something  like 
these, — "  May  God  go  forth  with  our  armies, — teach  their  hands 
to  war,  and  their  fingers  to  light,"  &,C-  In  the  evening.  Dr.  — , 
an  advocate  {or  peace,  prayed  that  "  God  would  have  mercy  upon 
our  abandoned  soldiery, — restr.ain  them  from  blood,"  &,c.  This 
glaring  inconsistency  had  such  an  effect  on  this  gentleman,  that  it 
produced  a  revolution  in  his  opinions,  and  led  him   ultimately  into 


71 

thau  listen, — that  they  actually  are  able  to  join  with 
their  miuister  in  his  free  prayer,  they  then,  as  we  con- 

tlie  Episcopal  church  ;  of  whicli  he  is  now  a  respecteible  minister. 
Wc  might  till  a  volume  with  iiislances  of  these  absurdities.  Doubt- 
less all  of  our  readers,  who  are  familiar  with  this  mode  of  worship, 
can  recollect  some  which  have  occured  within  their  own  knowl- 
edge. AYho  does  not  know  of  the  disposition  to  meddle  with 
state  affair;,  which,  time  immemorial,  has  been  vented  in  the 
pulpit  throughout  New-England  on  the  semi-annual  returns  of  fast 
and  thanksgiving  days.  If  it  is  said,  that  Episcopal  pulpits  are  not 
free  from  this  censure,  we  reiiiy  that  it  has  not  yet  been  able  to 
find  its  way  into  the  desk^  to  mingle  with  the  prayers,  an  advantage, 
which  we  dispassionately  think,  to  be  no  small  one.  The  English 
authors  of  a  "•  New  Director}'  for  non-conformist  Churches," 
quoted  in  a  review  in  the  Christian  Observer,  after  condemning  a 
similar  practice  in  their  own  country,  as  well  as  other  defects  in 
their  mode  of  worship,  say — "  This  is  highly  reprehensible.  But 
how  much  more  so  is  it,  in  Christian  ministers,  when  addressini>" 
the  Alm.ighty,  to  throw  out  bitter  reproofs,  or  sarcastic  rcllectlons, 
on  any  of  their  fellow  Christians,  whether  present  or  absent,  on 
account  of  either  obnoxious  sentiments,  or  suspicious  conduct. 
Yet  we  are  sorry  to  say,  we  have  known  ministers  ready,  on  all 
occasions,  in  this  way  to  indulge  their  angry  passions,  and  that, 
even  towards  their  brethren."  The  following  is  from  the  same 
source.  "  It  may  serve  to  set  some  people  right  in  this  matter 
[the  dissenting  mode  of  prayer]  to  reflect  upoa  the  ingenuous  con- 
fession, made  by  one  who  had  been  much  admired,  and  followed 
for  his  talent  in  praying  extempore.  Dr.  Mapletoft,  having  a  pray- 
er read  to  him,  which  had  been  a  good  time  before,  taken  from 
his  own  mouth  in  short-hand,  and  being  asked  his  judgement  of  it, 
found  so  many  absurd  and  indecent  expressions,  that  when  he  was 
told,  he  zvas  the  man  who  had  used  it,  he  begged  God's  pardon 
for  his  former  bold  presumption  and  folly,  and  resolved  never 
more  to  offend  in  this  kind,  but  to  pen  first  of  all  the  prayers  he 
should  hereafter  use  in  public."  .See  also  the  Blacksmith's  Letter. 
The  same  authors,  speaking  of  the  disiwe  of  the  Bible  among  tjie 


72 

ceive,  undeniably  pray  by  a  form,  and,  as  far  as  they 
are  concerned,  a  set  form  too  ;  for  they  pray  in  the 
words  of  another,  in  words  which  they  participate 
neither  in  framing  nor  in  uttering,  and  of  which  indeed 
they  have  no  knowledge  till  they  are  uttered.  Of  all 
forms  we  conceive  these  the  most  objectionable.* 

It  is  an  unquestioned  fact  tliat  the  Jews  in  their  public 
worship  used  a  set  form  of  prayers.  "  Fhe  world/' — 
says  Wheatley, — '*  is  fully  satisfied  of  this  truth  from 
the  concurrent  testimony  of  the  best  writers  on  antiqui- 
ties." In  what  way  could  this  custom  have  arisen  ? 
As  it  was  intimately  blended  with  their  religious  in- 
stitutions, it  is  hardly  probable  that  it  could  have  origi- 

Independents  and  others,  which  it  seems  was  kept  aside  only  to  be 
used  as  a  sort  of  crecc?,  say, — "  Half  a  century  ago,  there  was 
scarcely  one  of  these  societies  in  London,  where  the  reading  of  a 
chapter  in  the  Bible  would  have  been  tolerated,  and  in  most  of 
their  meetings  in  the  country,  (though  almost  half  the  people 
could  not  read)  it  would  have  been  considered  as  a  mark  of 
heterodoxy  for  a  minister  to  read  the  Bible  to  them  1"  Have 
their  brethren  in  this  country  purged  out  this  leaven,  or  are  they 
still  a  Huh  "  papistical"  1 

*  The  Reviewer  does  not  seem  to  have  been  aware  that  some 
of  his  own  reasons  are,  substantially,  in  favour  of  set  forms. — 
"  The  topics  of  prayer  are,  from  its  nature,  limited  ;  and  ought 
to  be  and  in  a  great  degree  are  familiar. — Every  person  has  forms 
of  expression,  which  in  some  respect  belong  to  him,  and  are  a 
guide  to  his  meaning  before  the  whole  is  uttered. — Nor  is  every 
prayer  offered  in  the  church  wholly  different  from  all  others,"  &c. 
If  resemblance  in  part  to  forms  enhances  the  value  of  extempora- 
neous prayer,  how  much  better  would  be  entire  conformity. — And 
if  these  remarks  are  true  where  the  congregation  are  coafincd 
mostly  to  their  own  minister,  how  does  it  operate  where  exchanges 
of  pulpit  service,  occur  almost  every  week  ? 


73 

Hated  in  the  unguided  imagination  of  their  own  minds. 
jMen  had,  doubtless,  "  prayed  to  God/'  as  the  Review- 
!er  quotes  Palmer  as  saying, — "  two  thousand  years  be- 
fore any  books  were  written,*'  but  does  it  necessarily 
follow  that  because  there  were  no  books,  there  were  no 
forms  of  prayer  ?  Was  oral  communication  impossible? 
Had  tradition  no  existence  ?  In  one  of  the  earliest  books 
which  was  written,  that  of  Deuteronomy,  in  thecompassof 
a  page  or  two  there  are  no  less  than  four  forms  of  prayer, 
of  divine  appointment  ;  and  in  the  book  of  Numbers, 
there  is  also  the  well  Icnown  blessing  of  the  priests.* 
That  our  Saviour  made  no  olyection  to  forms  but  rather 
approved  them  is  shown  by  his  attending  the  service 
of  the  Jcwisli  Synagogue,  where  forms  were  always 
used,  and  from  his  giving  a  form  to  his  disciples,  whether 
as  a  pattern  merely,  or  a  set  form,  it  is  not  now  material 
to  inquire.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  set  forms 
were  used  in  the  primitive  church.  Foley f-\  speaking 
of  the  writings  of  Polycarp,  who,  he  says,  '^^  Had 
been  taught  by  the  apostles,-'  observes, — "I  select  the 
following  as  fixing  the  authority  of  the  Lord's  prayer, 
and  the  use  of  it  among  the  primitive  Christians. — If 
therefore  wapraij  the  Lord  that  he  will  forgive  us,  we 
ought  alsotoforgivey  "  With  supplication &eseec/i2?i^ 
fclie  all- seeing  God,  not  to  lead  us  into  temptation.^' 
Wheatley  quoies  several  of  the  ancient  Fathers  to  the 

*  Numbers  vi.  23-26.  Deuteronomy  xxi.  7-8. — xxvi.  3,  S-ld. 
13-15.  These  instances,  with  that  of  our  Saviour,  are,  doubtless, 
ivhat  Dr.  VVyatt  alluded  to,  when  he  said,  "  the  lawfulness  of  rormis 
of  prayer  was  established  by  a  divine  appointoaeat ." 

t  Work?,  vol.  ii.  p.  112. 
10 


74 

same   effect.*     True,   the  Reviewer  quotes  Tertullifiii 
as  saying, — "  that    they  prayed   without    any  other 
prompter  than  their  own  hearts/'  but  we  certainly  be- 
lieve such   prompting  to  be  perfectly  compatible  with 
the  use  of  a  prescribed  form  ;  and  we  also  believe  the 
same  as   to    the   sense  of   hi?>    quotation  from  Justin 
Martyr, — "  That  the  president  prayed  according  to  his 
ability,''  or  as  we  should  read  it,  icith  all  kis   ability. 
The  ancient  Liturgies  called  by  the  names  of  St.  Peter, 
St.  Mark,  and  St.  James,   although  it  will  not  now 
be  asserted   that  they  were  actually  written  by  those 
apostles,  are  yet  unquesiiouably  very  ancient.     That  of 
St.  James  was  certainly  used  in  the  church  at  Jerusa- 
lem  in  St.  Cyril's  time,  who  was   chosen  Bishop   of 
Jerusalem,  about  A.  B.  350,  and  who,  says  St.  Jerome, 
wrote  a  comment  upou  it  in  his  yoimger  days.     Forms 
of  prayer  were  used  then  in  the  primitive  days  of  the] 
church, — in   the   days  of  her  purity,  and  it  Avas  not, 
probably,  till  "  ignorant  and  unwortliy  ecclesiastics" 
intruded  themselves   upon  the   church,   ^»  in  the  fourth 
and  fifth  centuries,"  that  it  was  found  necessary  to  im- 
pose authoritatively  what  before  had  been  performed  by 
common  consent  and  freeAvill. 

Of  the  expediency  of  forms  of  prayer  in  public  wor- 
ship we  make  no  doubt,  for  we  think  them  productive  oi 
great  advantage. 

They  can  be  thoroughly  digested  and  understood  by 
the  whole  congregation  before  they  are  called  upon  to 
use  them.  The  very  nature  of  public  worship  sup- 
poses  a  participation  on  the  part  of  the  people.     It  is 

*  TertuUian,  Cyprian,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Chrysostom  an« 
others. 


75 

not  to  hear  their  minister  pray  to  God  ; — it  is  not  to  be 
captivated  with  the  entlmsiasm,  or  eloquence  of  his  man- 
ner in  pr.iycr,  that  congregations  are  assembled  ;  neither 
is  it  ijrinci pally  for  tbe  purpose  of  hearing  his  in- 
structions, however  practical, useful,  and  necessary  they 
may  be.  But  it  is  for  public  or  coiamon  prayer  ; — it  is 
for  the  purpose  of  joining  together  in  acts  of  homage, 
praise,  and  supplication  to  God.  '*  The  minister  is 
but  tne  moulii  of  the  coih;regation,  and  the  mouth  should 
speak  the  mind  of  tlie  congregation."  The  duty 
belongs  to  the  assembly  in  its  collective  capacity.  The 
audible  performaace  of  some  parts  at  least,  should 
therefore  be  assigned  to  them,  and  the  remainder 
should,  at  least,  be  fully  understood  by  them  before 
its  utterance,  that  they  may  be  able  to  give,  or  (if  their 
peace  of  minds  so  require)  to  refuse,  the  full  assent  of 
their  minds.  This  cannot  be  the  case  with  extempora- 
neous, or  free  prayer,  because  in  both  tiiese  cases  the 
minister  substitutes  his  own  mind  for  the  mind  of  the 
people.  They  know  not  wliat  he  is  about  to  address  to 
the  Deity  in  their  name.  If  their  minds  are  lifted  up  to 
God  at  the  close  of  the  sentence  they  must  immediately 
withdraw  them  again,  and  fix  them  upon  their  minister, 
till  he  has  finished  another  :  so  at  the  close  of  the  prayer 
it  is  doubtful  whether  C)Iod,or  the  minister,  has  been  most 
in  their  thoughts.  But  where  the  same  form  which  the 
minister  is  to  use  is  before  the  people,  this  cause  of  dis- 
traction is  removed  ;  they  can  follow  him  v.lLhout  in- 
terruption, while  their  thoughts  are  fixed  upon  God, 
and  the  warm  feeling  of  devotion  stimulates  them  to 
pray  witii  the  spirit  and  M'ith  thq  understanding  also. 


76 

Of  a  religion  purely  spiritual  man  knows  notliing.— 
He  must  be  interested  through  the  medium  of  his  senses. 
We   have  formerly  been  struck  with  the  truth  of  this 
remark  when  witnessing  "the  simplicity  of  congrega- 
tional worship."     We  have   observed  the  many  awk- 
ward positions,  into  which  a   congregation  would  be 
thrown  upon  the  summons  to  prayer.     Instead  of  hum- 
bly falling  on  the  knees,  and  shutting  out  from  the  sight 
every  thing  which  could  distract  the  attention,  it  rather 
seemed  an  object  to  place  the  body  in  a  situation  of  ae 
much  ease  as  a  partially  erect  posture   would  admit  ;* 
the  looks  of  many  indicated  inability  to  fix  their  minds 
either  upon  the  object,  or  the  organ  of  their  devotions,  or 
perhaps,  a  disposition  to  scrutinize  the  situation  and  ap- 
pearance of  others.     If  tlie  devotion  of  the  minister  hap- 
pened to  begreater  than  usual,  restlessness  became  obser- 
vable,— now  and  then  a  beseeching  eye  was  turned  to  the 
pulpit,  as  if  to  remind  its  occupant  that  his  hearer^s  atten- 
tion was  exhausted.     We  do  not  say  that  these  habits 
are  discernable  in  every  congregation  of  this  sect,  but 
we   certainly  have  sometimes   witnessed   them.     We 
think,  however,  it  will  not  be  questioned,  ih'di  a. consider- 
able portion  of  such   congregations  esteem  themselves 
rather  sls  hearers  of  prayer  than  as  j^ra^iw^  themselves. f 

*  With  this  view,  some  of  the  congregational  meeting-houses  of 
New-England  have  seats  made  moveable  with  hinges,  so  that  the 
body  may  rest  against  the  sides  of  the  pew. 

t  "  The  pious  Mr.    Bennet,   an   eminent   dissenting   minister," 
quoted  in  the  non-conformist's  Directory,  (p.  47.)  says — "  There 
is  nothing  I  apprehend  we  are  more  generally  defective  in,  than 
in  performing  this  part  of  religious   worship.     That  careless  air,  ■ 
jvhich  sits  upon  the  face  of  a  congregation,  shows  how  httle  they 


77 

'J'liese  difficulties  do  not  exist, — certainly  not  to  this 
extent, — witii  those  who  use  set  forms.  By  them  the 
attention  is  secured  :  the  posture  excludes  impediments^ 
and  is,  of  itself,  a  help  to  devotion  :  the  prayer  book  re- 
minds them  of  their  share  in  the  duty  before  them,  and 
instructs  them  how  to  perform  it.  Thus  external  cir- 
cumstances are  brought  in  to  aid  in  exciting  devotional 
feelings  ;  these,  again,  have  their  action  on  tiie  mind, 
and  impel  to  greater  earnestness  in  the  solemn  prayers 
and  praises.  ^^  In  regard  to  the  importance  of  prayer, 
the  ideas  of  serious  church  people  seem  generally  the 
most  correct,''  says  the  Non-conformist's   Directory.* 

Neither  are  we  disposed  to  regard  it  as  a  light  ad- 
vantage of  forms  that  they  serve  as  a  standard  of  doc- 
trine. The  Reviewer  and  his  party,  we  know,  object 
to  this,  as  an  entrenchment  protecting  error  from  the 

know  of  the  matter,  and  how  iew  seriously  join  in  puhUc  prayar. 
Some  gaze  about  them,  others  fall  asleep,  others  fix  their  eyes  on 
the  minister."  The  following  anecdote,  we  have  recently  learnt 
has  been  for  some  time  current  in  Boston.  A  certain  eminent 
congregational  preacher,  having,  on  a  certain  occasion,  greatly 
exceeded  his  competitors  in  this  species  of  pulpit  eloquence,  was 
said,  by  one  of  his  enlightened  congregation,  to  have  "  delivered 
the  most  delightful  prayer  ever  addressed  to  a  Boston  audience  !'* 
We  have  graver  authority  for  this  opinion,  hi  the  Journal  of  the 
Convention  which  recently  sat  in  Boston,  for  the  alteration  of  the 
Constitution  of  Massachusetts,  (with  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  State 
for  its  President,  and  many  eminent  laymen  and  clergymen  for  its 
members,)  as  published  in  the  Boston  Centinel,  we  observe,  that 
en  Dec.  22,  1820,  the  Convention  met  and  ''  heard  prayers,  by  the 
Rev,  Mr.  Jenks:"  and  also  that  on  Jan.  3,  lo21,  they  '•^  heard 
prayers  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  rallVoy."' — These  geutlemen  were  its 
chaplain?. 
*  Page  56; 


78 

assaults  of  truth,  but  2£'eliave  uot  yet  subscribed  to  theii* 
definitioQ  of  error,  and  we  certainly  shall  wait  till  "the 
glorious  blaze  of  light"  which  they  suppose  to  be 
kindling  all  around  them,  shall  become  less  fluctuating, 
before  we  deem  them  jirepared  to  answer  the  question, 
what  is  truth  ?  All  men  are  not  learned,  nor  can  they 
be  ;  many,  even  in  our  own  hnppy  country,  cannot 
read  the  Bible  when  it  is  placed  in  their  hands,  and 
g;reat  is  the  number  of  those  in  all  Christian  countries 
who  look  to  the  public  services  of  religion  for  the  ac- 
quisition of  religious  knowledge.  However  disposed, 
then,  the  clergy  may  be,  and  they  certainly  are  but 
men,  to  neglect  the  duty  of  instruction,  to  v/andcr  into 
remote  and  abstract  speculations,  or  to  speak  in 
language  above  the  comprehension  of  the  whole  or  a 
part  of  their  hearers,  still  the  beacon  of  the  Liturgy 
bears  a  steady  and  uniform  light,  perceptible  to  the 
dimmest  vision. 

As  it  regards  extemporaneous  prayer,  the  truth  seems 
to  be,  that,  when  it  was  first  introduced,  it  was  on  the 
ground  of  its  being  a  sort  oi  secondary  inspiration,  and 
on  this  ground  its  use  is  still  defended  by  most  of  the 
illiterate  sectarians  of  the  present  day.  The  Reviewer 
is  conscious  that  this  notion  is  indefensible,  he  therefore 
bids  adieu  to  the  Puritans,  and  comes  half  waij  to  church. 

It  is  time,  however,  to  notice  his  grave  charges  against 
the  Episcopal  book.  He  first  objects  that  it  is  a  per- 
petual form  :  and  tliis  he  supports  by  the  very  grave 
assertion  that  our  addresses  to  the  throne  of  grace  are 
dictated  by  men,  all  of  Avhom  have  been  in  their  graves 
more  than  an  hundred,  and  some  more  than  a  thousand 
years.     We  wonder  it  did  not  occur  to  him  to  object, 


79 

also,  that  the  text  hoolc  on  which  our  public  discourses 
are  founded,  and  which  dictates  our  religious  principles, 
is  equally  as  ancient  if  not  more  so.     Our  readers  may 
smile,  but  we  should  like  to  have  the  difference  in  the 
arguments  pointed  out  to  us,  if  they  can  find  any.     As 
uo  small  portion  of  the  Liturgy  is   drawn    from  the 
scriptures,   and  many  of  the  prayers  are  in  their  very 
words,  we  suppose  we  may  say  that  the  apostles  have 
some  claim  to  be  considered  among  these  dictators. ^ — We 
may  possibly  go  farther,  and  include  our  Saviour  himself, 
for  we  certainly  use  "  fast  days,  feast  days,  and  saint's 
days,  the  whole  year  long,  and  every  year,"   the  very 
prayer  wliich  he  instructed  his  disciples  to  use.     We 
have,  moreover,  the  Psalms   mingled  in   a  variety   of 
ways   witii  our  service,  which   are  still  older  than  the 
Lord's   prayer.      We  certainly    cannot    perceive  tlie 
we'urht  of  this    arirument.     Of  what  importance  is  it 
that   ^*  since  their  time  the  modes  of  thinking  and   ex- 
pression are  considerably  changed,"   or  that  '^  we  arc 
able   to  apprehend  the  same   thoughts  in  a  somewhat 
different   shape  and   order  :"     Almost  every  objection 
against  the  church,  w  hich  is  to  be  found  in  this  appalling 
Review,  is  as  old  as  the  earlier  Puritans,  and  not  one 
of  theiii,  as   we  believe,  can  date  its  first  existence  as 
late  as  the  last  century,  aiid  yet,  though  they   appear 
here  in  a  "  somewhat   different  shape   and  order,"  we 
I   do  not  see  that  they  are  a  wliit  "  more  interesting,"  or  iu 
I  any  respect  more  convincing.     But  to  be  serious.     Can 
the  reader  bring  himself  to  believe,   tliat  this  objection 
I  is  produced  as  of  weight  against  forms  of  prayer  ?  Can 
he  convince  himself  that  it  will  be  any  gratification  to 
the  Deity  ; — that  it  will  call  his  attention  more  forcibly 


80 

io  otli*  prayers,  if  wc  vary  their  language  only,  while 
their  essence  remains  the  suns  ?  Is  there  not  some- 
thing, considering  from  what  quarter  it  comes,  of  egre- 
gious self-exaUation  in  this  ?  What  is  it  hut  saying, 
'^  true  Christianity  is  a  common  blessing  ;  all  its  advan- 
tages are  laid  open  to  all  men,  who,  nevertheless,  ever 
have  been  and  ever  will  be  much  the  same  ;  they  still 
have  sins  to  c(»!ifess,  mercies  for  which  to  be  thankful^ 
and  wants  to  be  supplied.  To  express  unitedly,  our 
feelings  on  these  points  to  our  Father  in  Heaven  we 
publickly  assemble  ;  but  then  as  the  frequent  repetition 
of  these  things  would  tire,  it  is  best  to  allow  the  clergy 
to  display  their  talents  in  transposing  the  thoughts,  and 
varying  the  language.  Tiiis  will  give  scope  for  their 
abilities  and  cultivation  ?"*  It  would  only  he  more  un- 
reasonable, in  our  opinion,  to  require  each  individual  of 
the  congregation  to  perform  the  duty  by  turns  ;  if  novel- 
ty is  tiie  only,  or  chief  object,  this  method  would  as 
effectually,  and  not  ^rnuch  more  objectionably,  produce 

*  Bishop  Dchon  thought  ditTerently  on  this  subject.  The  follow- 
ing eloquent  pas«iage  is  from  his  Sermon  delivered  before  the 
General  Convention,  1814.  "  Wbo  w'buld  not  wish,  in  the  temple, 
to  bear  upon  his  lips  those  psalms,  and  prayers,  in  which  the 
glorious  company  of  the  apostles,  the  goodly  fellowship  of  the 
prophets,  and  the  noble  army  of  martyrs,  have  uttered  their  devo- 
tions to  God  !  How  dead  must  he  be  to  the  finest  associations^ 
■which  can  affect  the  mind^  who  is  not  animated  to  a  devout  and  fer- 
vent performance  of  his  part  of  the  service  of  the  sanctuary,  by 
the  consideration,  that,  upon  this  same  censer,  which  the  church 
holds  out  to  him,  incense  has  been  put  by  hands  which  are  now 
extended  before  the  throne  of  the  Almighty,  and  that  as  the  smoke 
ascended,  thosQ  eyes  were  lifted  up  to  Heaven,  which  are  now 
fixed  upon  the  visible  glory  of  God  and  the  Lamb."  We  recoiu-' 
mend  this  Sermon  to  the  attentive  perusal  of  our  readers. 


81 

it.  Personal  blessings,  as  we  conceive,  have,  in  ^^eneral, 
Hotliini;  to  do  with  public  congregational  worsliip  ;  they 
belonj^  to  the  closet. 

Neither  do  we  think,  with  the  Reviewer,  that  the 
pro^Tcss  of  scriptural  knowledge,  or,  at  least,  that 
species  of  it,  which  he  would  commend,  is  like  to  pro- 
duce much  change  in  the  sentiments  of  Episcopalians 
with  regard  to  the  Liturgy.  That  all  the  members  of 
the  church  are  not  perfectly  satisfied  with  regard  to 
every  part  of  her  formularies  may  be  true.  But  this 
may  arise  from  various  causes  :  it  would  be  natural  to 
look  for  it  in  tlie  structure  of  the  human  mind,  which  is 
acknowledged  on  all  sides  to  be  desultory  in  its  views, 
(and,  in  this  respect,  it  is  in  our  opinion  not  a  little  in 
favour  of  the  Liturgy,  that  the  attachment  is  so  strong 
and  general)  ; — it  may  be  occasioned  by  possessed,  or 
supposed,  increase  of  knowledge  ;  and  it  is  just  as 
likely  to  be  produced  by  ignorance.  There  are,  it  is 
true,  great  pretensions  to  scriptural  knowledge  in  our 
day,  but  we  are  not  quite  clear  that  these  pretensions 
have  ample  foundations,  and  we  are  somewhat  afraid 
that  their  progressive  tendency  is,  to  deprive  us  of  all 
those  portions  of  such  knowledge,  which  are  of  impor- 
tance to  us  as  disciples  of  a  crucified  Saviour.  When 
the  Reviewer  asserts,  that  "  the  mass  of  Episcopalians 
at  the  present  day  dissent  in  many  particulars  (unim- 
portant, they  will  say)  from  tbe  sentiments  of  the  au- 
tJiors  and  comjjilers  of  the  service  book,"  he  shelters 
I  himself  behind  an  entrenchment,  so  broad  and  compre- 
I  hensive,  that  we  know  not  where  to  find  him.  With 
i  the  sentiments  of  the  authors  and  compilers  of  that 
book,  we  have  no  more  to  do  in  onr  prayers  and  reli- 
11 


82 

gioLis  services,  thau  we  have  with  the  sentiments  of 
Churchmen  at  any  period  subsequent,  to  that  in  which 
they  lived.  And  it  was  certainly  for  no  very  generous 
purpose  that  such  an  insinuation  was  thrown  out.  The 
sentiments  of  the  prayer  book  have  a  higher  orighi. 
If  however,  the  particulars  in  which  some,  or  even  the 
mass  of  Episcopalians  dissent  from  these  sentiments, 
are  in  their  own  opinion  unimjwrtant^  upon  what 
groimd  does  the  Reviewer  undertake  to  censure  them  ? 
We  have  mixed  much,  and  familiarly,  among  Episco- 
palians through  a  large  portion  of  our  country,  and  yet 
we  are  unable  to  surmise  to  what  particulars  the  lie- 
viewer  can  have  reference,  and  we  utterly  deny  the  ex- 
istence of  this  difficulty  in  any  important,  or  even  uni- 
form extent.  Doubtless  there  are  some  among  us,  who 
cither  from  the  natural  bias  of  their  minds, — from  some 
prejudice  of  education, — from  ignorance  of  the  motives, 
and  reasons  on  which  it  is  founded,  or  from  other 
causes,  find  it  convenient,  and  necessary  to  their  peace 
of  mind  to  omit  participating  in  one,  or  another,  part  of 
the  service,  and  while  their  motives  are  honest,  we,  at 
least,  will  not  blame  them.  But  may  not  this  principle 
exist  and  as  actively  too,  where  free  prayer  or  extempo- 
raneous is  used  ?  Are  all  the  preachers,  wlio  adopt 
these  methods,  as  cautious  as  the  Reviewers  plan' 
would  require  ?  We  greatly  fear,  that  even  among 
them  some  dark  mountains  might  be  found,  on  which 
the  feet  of  the  pious  Avould  stumble.  Here,  however, 
we  think,  the  Liturgy  has  the  advantage,  for  those,  if 
there  are  such,  who  cannot  conscientiously  adopt  all  its 
services,  may  find  some  parts,  and  those,  it  may  be,  suffi- 
cient in  which  they  can  participate  :  and  so  much  is  the 


I 


83 

iervice  broken  into  short  prayers  and  forms,  that  they 
>vill  find  no  necessity  for  mental  reservation,  but  may 
!;ive,  or  Avithhold,  their  assent  as  they  find  it  expedient; 
vhile  on  the  other  side  there  is  no  room  for  the  exer- 
•ise  of  this  liberty, — they  must  add  their  amen  to  the 
vhole  or  omit  it  altogether. 

Tlie  Reviewer  appears  someAvhat  uneasy  when  he  is 
uduced  to  speak  of  the  strong  hold  which  the  Liturgy 
las  on  the  affections  of  Churchmen.  He  greatly  dreads, 
hat,  being  placed  too  near  the  Bible,  it  may  in  time  take 
ts  place.  Now,  we  think,  we  may  with  perfect  sin- 
:erity  assure  him  that  it  is  not  with  Churchmen  that 
he  Bible  is  in  danger  of  being  undervalued,  or  of  being 
iuperseded  by  any  book  whatever.  If  that  blessed  book 
)e  in  danger,  we  have  no  doubt,  tliat  even  the  mass  of 
Uongregationalists  will  join  us  in  saying,  it  is  from  a 
lifferent  quarter.  We  believe  there  can  be  no  impro- 
iriety  in  terming  the  Liturgy  admirahUy  and  we  cer- 
ainly  have  full  license  to  place  it  in  the  very  front  of 
ill  iininsjnred  compositions.*     That  it  was  preserved 

*Dr.  Adam  Clark,  author  of  a  Commentary  on  the  Bible,  novt 
jublishing,  in  which  as  extensive  and  various  erudition  is  displayed, 
IS,  perhaps,  in  the  works  of  any  modern  writer, — a  methodist, 
ind,  of  course,  a  dissenter  from  the  English  church,  says  of  the 
Liturgy,  that  '•  it  is  a  work  almost  universally  esteemed  by  the 
ievoutand  pious,  of  every  denomination,  and  the  greatest  effort  of 
|hc  reformation  next  to  the  translation  of  the  scriptures  into  the 
English  language.*' — Commentary.  Note  to  preface.  "  The  English 
yiturgy,'' — says  the  learned  Grotius,  "  comes  so  near  the  primitive 
battern  that  none  of  the  reformed  churches  can  compare  with  il.'' 
obert  Hall,  a  baptist,  and  one  of  llie  most  eminent  of  the  English 
issenters,  speaks  of  it  thus — "  I  beliere  the  evangelical  purity 
of  its  sentiments,  the  chastened  fervour  of  its  devotions,  the  majestir 


84 

IVom  the  violent  hands  of  Papists  and  Puritans,  in  the 
veign  of  Elizabeth,  by  the  terror  of  penal  laws,  we 
are  not  disposed  to  deny  : — It  is  certain  such  lawi 
were  passed,  and,  doubtless,  in  some  instances  executed. 
We  are  not  able  at  this  time  to  judge  fully  of  the  mo- 
tives which  led  to  their  enactment,  but  we  certainly 
have  no  disposition  to  defend  such  a  polfcy.  Ought  we 
not,  however,  to  have  expected  a  policy  somewhat  more 
liberal,  when,  at  a  period  near  a  century  later,  '^^  the 
best  scholai's,  preachers,  and  men  in  the  nation," — that 
is, — the  Puritans  had  acquired  the  government,  by  w  hat 
means  we  are  not  concerned  to  state  ?  Things  seem, 
however,  to  have  been  managed  much  the  same  as  be- 
fore.*    The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  admitted  of 

simplicity  of  its  language,  have  placed  the  English  Liturgy  in  the 
very  first  rank  of  uninspired  compositions." — Speech  before  Leices- 
ter Bible  Society.  We  cannot  think  even  Episcopalians  would  wish 
to  speak  of  the  Liturgy  in  stronger  terms  than  these  writers. 

*  We  are  sorry  that  the  Reviewer  entirely  overlooked  the  fol- 
lowing counterpart  to  his  extract  from  Blackstone.  "  If  any  per- 
son or  persons^  shall  wse,  or  cause  to  be  used^  the  book  of  common 
prayer^  (which,  let  it  be  remembered,  all  the  clergy  stood  bound  by 
their  ordination  vows  to  use)  every  such  person  so  offending^  shall 
for  the  first  offence  pay  five  pounds^  for  the  second  ten,  and  for  thei 
third,  suffer  one  -whole  yearns  imprisonment  without  bail  or  mainprize^H 
May  9,  1644.  One  would  think  this  sufficient;  but  it  seems  it  wai 
not  found  so.  "  Every  Minister  who  shalt  not  henceforth  observe  tk 
Directory,  according  to  its  true  intent  and  meaning,  in  all  the  exercis 
of  the  public  worship  of  God,  shall  for  every  time  he  shall  so  offend^ 
forfeit  and  pay  forty  skillingsy  "  Every  one  who  shall  bring  it  hit 
contempt,  neglect,  or  oppose  it  ;  who  shall  preach,  write,  print,  oi 
cause  to  be  published,  any  thing  against  the  directory,  shall  for  ever 
such  offence,  pay  such  a  sum  of  money,  as  itpon  trial  shall  be  thought  fit 
provided   it  be  not  wider  £^,  nor  above  £50".     August   23,  164& 


85 

no  temporising  spirit.  And  it  is  certainly  through  no 
fault  of  these  godly  men,  as  they  styled  themselves,  that 
M'e  are  now  able  to  utter  our  prayers  in  the  language  of 
apostles,  prophets,  and  martyrs.  But  even  granting  that 
the  Liturgy  was  upheld  by  the  terror  of  law  in  the  days 
of  Elizabeth,  and  even  subsequently  in  England,  by 
what  force  ha^  it  been  supported,  and  so  widely  spread 
in  our  own  country  that  several  stereotype  presses  are 
in  almost  constant  operation  to  supply  the  demand  for 
it?*  The  Reviewer  appears  to  think,  that,  on  the 
point  of  veneration  for  the  Liturgy,  he  cannot  .accuse  us 
too  strongly.  He  says  that  ^'  even  the  word  of  God  is 
by  many  not  thought  Jit  to  go  abroad  without  the  book 
of  common  prayer  by  its  side,  &c.''  We,  at  once,  al- 
low that  there  are  societies  both  in  this  country  and 
England  for  the  joint  distribution  of  the  Bible  and 
prayer  book,  and  it  is  certainly  true  that  many  Epis- 
copalians deem  this  the  best  mode  of  proceeding  in  re- 
ference to  both  ;  but  that  any  will  go  the  extent  of  the 
Reviewers  assertion  we  utterly  deny.  What  is  the 
practice  of  these  societies  ?  "  Li  truth," — says  one  of 
their  public  documents, — '^  they  hold  them  both  with  an 
equal  hand,  giving  both  or  either,  according  to  the  needs 
and  desires  of  the  applicant ;  if  he  had  not  a  Bible,  they 

Now  all  this  was  done  by  Puritans,  and  to  us  has  very  much  the 
appearance  of  retaHation,  an  eye  for  an  eye,  k-c.  That  these  laws 
were  not  so  severe  in  their  penalties  as  those  of  Elizabeth,  is 
owing  we  believe  more  to  the  fact,  that  their  operation  would  be 
upon  the  mass  of  the  clergy  who  were  already  under  coun- 
ter obligations,  which,  of  themselves,  they  could  not  remove, 
rather  than  to  any  lenity  in  those  who  passed  them. 

*  Ten  thousand  copies  were  printed  in  the  city  of  Pfew-York  in 
the  vear  1817  alone  ! 


86 

gave  him  one ;  if  lie  had  a  Bible  the  girt  was  best 
doubled;  by  giving  him  that  book  which  aided  liim  in 
the  pra(itical  use  of  it/'  But  is  the  Reviewer  and  his 
sect  so  infatuated;  that  they  suppose  whatever  may  be 
wrong  in  others  is  perfectly  right  in  themselves  ?  Kvea 
since  the  publication  of  this  Review,  a  society  has  been 
established  at  Baltimore,  '^  for  distributing  the  Bible 
and  other  books  giving  rational  and  consistent  views  of 
Christianity.**  Does  the  Reviewer  think,  we  do  ..ot  re- 
gard the  Liturgy  as  both  rational  and  consistent  in  its 
views  of  the  gospel  ?  Or  is  it,  in  any  degree,  probable, 
that  works  so  long  established,  and  as  generally  accep- 
table as  the  prayer  book,  will  be  found  upon  the  cata- 
logue of  the  Baltimore  society  ?  We  do  not  think  him  so 
credulous  as  this.  And  when  he  refers  to  the  opinion 
of  Bishop  Marsh,  does  he  not  know,  that  the  contro- 
versy in  England,  was  not  about  the  value  or  usefulness 
of  the  Liturgy,  but  about  the  expediency  of  Church- 
men instituting  a  society  for  the  distribution  of  the  Bible 
alone,  when  there  already  existed  a  society  of  extensive 
labours,  and  in  need  of  funds,  for  the  purpose  of  circu- 
lating the  Bible  and  practical  religious  works  in 
general  ?* 

*  Some  of  our  readers  may  not  be  acquainted  with  the  fact,  that 
a  Society  was  instituted  at  London,  by  members  of  the  EngUsh 
fhurch,  so  far  back  as  1698,  "  for  the  promotion  of  Christian 
knowledge,''  and  that,  since  that  period,  they  have  distributed  an 
immense  number  of  Bibles,  prayer  books,  and  other  religious  books 
in  Europe,  Asia,  and  America.  The  amount  distributed  in  one 
year,  as  stated  in  the  Report  for  1819 — follows, — Bibles  (exclusive 
of  the  Society's  Family  Bible,)  32,150.  New-Testaments  and 
Psalters,  53,905.  Common  Prayer  Books,  91,621.  Other  bound 
books,  74,889.  Small  tracts,  half  bound,  &c.  913,483.  Books 
and  papers  issued  gratuitously,  261,700. 


87 

The  second  grave  cliaige  of  the  Reviewer  is  that  •'•  the 
English  form  of  worship/*'  as  in  the  fuUness  of  his  Uh- 
eraliti/  lie  calls  it. — ••  is  substantially  one  form.''  It  is 
so  indeed.  What  then  ?  Why,  *^'  come  a  famine,  or  a 
war;  be  a  church  in  the  garment  of  praise,  or  in  (he 
spirit  of  heaviness  ;  let  a  pestilence  depopulate  a  land, 
or  a  fire  lay  a  city  in  ashes  :  an  insurrection  threaten  a 
state,  or  a  despaired  of  victory  preserve  it,  when  you 
would  expect  to  hear  one  loud  burst  of  praise,  or  thrill- 
ing cry  foij  mercy,  the  inflexible  prayer  book  claims  all 
its  due,  &c.''  What  a  pompous,  sonorous,  piece  of  de- 
clamation !  We  read  it  aloud  to  try  its  force,  and  it  still 
rings  in  our  ears.  The  argument,  however,  has  visited 
our  ears  before,  and  we  esteem  it  a  very  trifling  one. 
The  following  extracts  will  be  conclusive  with  regard 
to  it.  ^'  The  wants  and  consequently  the  matter  of  the 
petitions  of  a  Christian  congregation,  must  in  tlie  main 
I)e  always  the  same  :  they  will  at  all  times  have  sins  to 
confess,  still  have  need  to  ask  pardon,  and  implore  the 
divine  grace  to  direct  their  thoughts,  words  and  actions  : 
it  will  ever  be  their  duty  to  pray  for  all  ranks  of  men,&c. 
If  any  general  calamity  should  happen  such  as  war,-' 
famine,  jiesiilencey  proper  forms  may  be  provided.  In 
private  cases,  perhaps,  it  might  be  more  for  the  honour  of 
our  religion  and  decency  of  our  worship,  that  we  did 
not  descend  to  particular  circumstances  so  much  as  we 
do.  It  is  needless  to  describe  the  diseases  to  an  omni- 
scient Ciod  :  nu>st  cases  of  this  nature  might  be  compre- 
hended under  the  general  names  of  sickness  and  dis- 
tress :  but  if  it  be  proper  to  deal  with  God  as  with  an 
ordinary  doctor,  and  to  lay  the  case  before  him  at  full 

*  Boo  note  on  pnif^  70  above. 


88 

length,  methods  may  be  found  to  indulge  the  huuiour  of 
the  clergy  in  this  respect,  without  leaving  our  whole 
worship  to  their  discretion,  and  putting  all  our  public 
petitions  in  their  power.*"  We  have  before  remarked 
that  those  congregations  which  do  not  use  set  forms  are 
very  apt  to  consider  themselves  but  as  hearers  of  prayer, 
and  when  Ave  find  the  Reviewer  sophistically  saying, 
that  the  same  sermon  preached  thus  often  would  fail 
to   sustain  attention,    we   are    almost  tempted  to  think 

*  Letter  to  the  eldei's  and  ministers  of  the  church  of  Scothmd, 
by  a  Blacksmith.  We  do  not  see  why  this  "  burst  of  praise,  or 
thrilUng  cry  for  mercy,"  is  to  be  expected  from  tlie  minister  only^ 
and  yet,  be  the  cause  what  it  may,  the  people  of  his  congregation, 
must  patiently  wait  "  while  he  begins  at  the  beginning  and  reads," 
or  repeats,  or  invents,  *•'  to  the  end,"  before  their  lips  may  open, 
and  then  but  for  a  solitary  cvncn.  What  room  is  here  for  the  en- 
thusiasm of  the  worshipper  to  display  itself  ?  Surely  it  is  as  com- 
pletely limited  as  by  any  form  whatever.  In  the  Episcopal  service 
there  would  be  some  place,  at  least,  where  the  fervor  of  gratitude 
would  find  its  vent, — the  fire  would  kihdle,  and  they  would  speak 
with  their  tongues.  "  I  think  it  would  be  scarcely  possible  for 
any  want  to  arise  of  a  private  or  domestic  nature  which  is  not 
somewhere  comprehended  in  the  Litany,  and  every  individual  will 
find  the  peculiarity  of  his  case  so  adverted  to,  that  he  will  be  able 
to  give  a  distinctness,  and  earnestness,  to  the  petition  which  em- 
braces his  heaviest  trials  to  the  Father  of  mercies  and  without  any 
one  but  himself,  (which  is  a  great  advantage,)  being  conscious  o. 
what  IS  passing  in  his  mind,  or  having  the  least  idea  of  the  pecu- 
liarity of  his  case."  J crrairi's  Conversations  on  Baptism^  (^Boston 
ed.  p.  162.)  Special  prayers  are  provided  in  the  Liturgy  for  most 
cases  of  necessity  ;  and  the  38th  Canon  provides  for  forming  such 
prayers,  as  peculiar  and  important  events,  of  a  general  nature,  may 
call  for.  It  may  not  be  amiss  to  remark  here,  that  among  Dr. 
Priestley's  published  forms  of  prayer  there  is  one  "  for  the  pre- 
sent state  of  Christians  to  be  used  on  Easter  Sunday.''^ 


89 

that  he  believes  so  too;  at  least,  it  shows  the  habit  of 
thinkins;  into  which  this  practice  lias  led  liini.  We 
have  not  the  least  hesitation  in  saying,  that  where  set 
forms  are  not  used  it  is  necesikry  for  the  preacher  to  in- 
trod;ice  into  his  prayers  as  much  novelty  as  he  conve- 
niently can,  and  we  have  heard  it  asserted  that  it  is  the 
constant  endeavour  of  some  of  the  most  eminent  of  this 
class  to  he  as  striking  as  possible  in  this  part  of  thei? 
duty  ;  not  from  any  belief  of  its  being  necessary  in  the 
sight  of  God,  nor  because  it  tends  to  stimulate  their 
own  devotion,  for  this  labouring  after  words  and  phrases 
is  obviously  of  a  contrary  tendency  ;  but  because  of  the 
difficulty  of  exciting  a  proper  devotional  temper  in  the 
uuinteresled  mass  before  them.  Till  this  elFect  is  pro- 
duced, their  labours  seem  in  vain,  and  in  the  end,  per' 
haps,  they  discover  to  tlse  wounding  of  their  pious  feel- 
ini:s,  that  thev  have  had  full  credit £;iven  them  for  their 
skill,  by  those  who  had  forgotten  to  pray  for  themselves. 
That  forms  may  be  used  witJiout  a  correspondent  de- 
A'otional  feeling  at  the  heart,  we  do  not  doubt,  and  we 
have  as  little  doubt  that  this  may  be  the  case  where /ree 
prayer  is  used.  The  external  action  of  devotion  is,  of 
itself,  nothing.  It  should  follow  the  devout  feeling  as 
any  other  elTect  follows  its  proper  cause.  If  devout 
feelings  do  not  exist,  we  know  not  how  the  congregations. 
of  the  Reviewers  sect,  are  j^ossihly  to  proceed  beyond 
mere  attention;  and  if  these  feelings  should  not  be  pro- 
duced till  near  the  close  of  the  prayer,  and  then  by  the 
enthusiasm  or  eloquence  of  the  preacher,  Ave  see  not 
bow  they  are  to  assent  to  a  prayer,  one  half  of  which, 
perhaps,  they  neither  understood  nor  heard.  Besides, 
at  the  moment  when  the  hearer's  attention  is  fully  excit- 
12 


90 

e.d,,  the  ill-timed  entrance  of  some  person  by  whom  ji 
door  is  sent  creaking  to  its  close  ;  a  cough,  which  some 
feeble  individual  is  unable,  or  some  thoughtless  youth 
Unwilling  to  restrain;  or  the  careless, bustling  movements 
of  the  sexton,  may  interrupt  his  hearing  the  beginning, 
or  tlie  conclusion  of  a  sentence,  while  he  is  seeking  a 
clue  to  which,  anotlier  is  so  imperfectly  heard,  that 
neither  are  more  than  half  understood.  When  the  Re- 
viewer seeks  to  illustrate  his  position,  by  what  most 
persons  experience  with  regard  to  the  Lord's  prayer, 
does  lie  not  see  that  he  is  literally  arguing  against  its 
use* in  childhood,  and  that  the  same  remarks  apply  to 
the  use  of  tlie  scriptures,  or  portions  of  them,  in  schools? 
Will  he  reject  this  laadable  practice,  lest,  subsequently 
we  should  come  to  tlieir  perusal  without  claiming  for 
them  the  recommendation  of  novelty? 

The  next  grave  charge  of  the  Reviewer  is,  that  "  the 
Liturgy  isfaultij  in  its  general  jdan,^^  He  dislikes  ^'  its 
separation  into  parts,"'  and  *^  would  think  it  much  better 
if  it  were  more  consolidated.*'  This  is,  as  he  says,  mat- 
ter for  the  judgement  of  every  individual,  and  every  one 
knows  that  what  may  be  particularly  acceptable  to  one, 
would  be,  perhaps,  as  fully  disagreeable  to  another. 
A  superficial  observer  may  not  indeed  see  much  connec- 
tion between  the  parts  of  the  service,  but  then  modesty 
should  teach  him,  that  he,  perhaps,  does  not  understand 
the  motives  which  led  to  the  offensive  arrangement. 
We  do  not  recollect  to  have  heard  any  objection  of  this 
sort  from  those  w  ho  are  at  all  accustomed  to  its  use  ;  on 
the  contrary  we  have  generally  found  the  feature,  liere 
objected  to,  an  admired  one.  ^*  But,"  says  tlie  RevieAV- 
cr,  <•  if  each  of  the  numerous   prayers  contain   what 


91 

belongs  to  a  prayer,  the  repetition  must  be  not  a  little 
tiresome :  if  not,  they  are  defective  in  themselves.'"'  iSo 
tliat  we  are,  one  way  or  another,  dpcidedly  wron;:^. 
Without  stopping  to  explore,  liis  quibble  on  the  word 
prayer,  we  remark,  that,  in  our  opinion,  even  a  scliool 
boy  might  have  ascertained  that  these  prayers  are  each 
perfect  in  themselves,  that  is,  that  each  contains  all,  per- 
haps, that  is  necessary  to  s?iy  upon  the  single  sul)ject 
wliicli  is  its  object.  If  then  there  is  for  each  subject 
which  is  prayed  for,  a  distinct  prayer,  there  ought  to  be, 
of  course,  as  many  of  them  as  the  general  necessities  of 
tlie  worshippers  require,  or  if  there  be  some  points,  and 
there  are  many,  which  do  not  well  admit  of  this  ar- 
rangement, they  should  be  combined  in  some  general 
prayer.  None  of  the  prayers  of  the  Liturgy  are  long, 
and  their  separation  puts  it  in  the  power  of  the  worship- 
pers to  give  their  assent  to  eacli  particular.  By  this 
means  their  attentiDu  is  continually  attracted  to  the 
duty  before  them,  and  the  mind  is  more  forcibly  re- 
strained from  wandering,  than,  probably,  would  be  the 
case  were  they  all  thrown  into  one.  "  The  arrange- 
ment is  not  huppy,'^  says  the  lieviewer  ;  "  no  good  rea- 
son appears  why  parts  of  the  service  should  stand  in 
the  appointed  order  rather  than  any  other.''  This  is  a 
curious  argument,  and  we  cannot,  Avithout  taking  out- 
readers  through  a  review  of  the  whole  Liturgy,  reply 
to  it  better  than  by  saying,  that  there  appears  no  reason 
for  change,  since  no  better  disposition  of  any  of  its  parts 
is  su"-"-ested.  The  latter  part  of  the  Litany,  of  which 
be  particularly  complains,  is  very  ancient  and  ^^  as  pre- 
pared for  use  in  times  of  persecuf  ion.  God  be  thanked, 
we  have  no  occasion  of  tiii*  kind  now.  and  it  is  there* 


92 

fore  in  this  country,  at  least,  2;cne rally  disused.  Tiio 
repetitions  altogether  arc  not  so  great,  nor  the  misman- 
agement so  obvious,  as  is  asserted  : — The  rubrics  do 
not  require  the  Lord's  prayer  to  be  used  more  tliau 
once,  except  the  Lord's  supper  be  adaiinistered,  or 
some  other  extra  service  be  used,  when  it  is  required 
in  a  single  additional  iustance  iti  each  of  these  services  ; 
in  every  other  instance  its  use  is  either  discretionary,  or 
merely  customary.  The  Gloria  Fatri  too  is  reffdired  to 
be  used  hut  once  in  the  course  of  the  service,  though  it 
is  permitted  to  be  used  oftener.  *     He  complains,  too,  of 

*  Cartwright,  the  leader  of  the  Piiiitans  in  the  days  of  Elizabeth, 
?ipeaks  thus  of  the  Gloria  Pt\tri, — "  It  was  lirst  brought  into  the 
church  to  the  end  that  men  thereby  should  make  an  open  pioi 
fession  in  the  church  of  the  divinity  of  the  Son  ol'God,  against  the 
detestable  opinions  of  Arius  and  his  disciples,  wherewith  at  that 
time  marvellously  swarmed  almost  the  whole  of  Christendom.t 
Now  that  it  hath  pleased  the  Lord  to  quench  that  fire,  there  is 
no  such  cause  why  these  things  should  be  used  in  the  church,  or, 
at  the  least,  why  that  Gloria  Patri  should  be  so  otten  repeated." 
To  the  same  eliect  he  remarked  upon  the  use  of  the  cross  in 
baptism,  which,  from  some  cause  the  Reviewer  has  not  noticed, 
Were  he  alive  in  our  day,  as  well  as  many  other  of  the  early 
Puritans,  we  think  they  would  admit  their  policy  to  have  beet 
short-sighted  in  the  extreme.  The  religion  of  the  Cross  is  nc 
variable  ;  our  chuixh,  as  we  believe,  has  conveyed  to  us  ihefuii^ 
once  delivered  to  the  saints,  and  we  have  no  objection  to  the  tanga 
ble  signs,  and  clear  expressions,  which  primitive  Christia( 
thought  necessary  in  their  day  for  the  distinct  expression  of  tlieiT 
faith.  Let  the  church  retain  them  "  till  the  consummation  of  all 
things."     See  Hooker's  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  b.  v.  sec.  35,  36. 

t  Bishop  Bull  says  it  was  in  use  from  the  earliest  times,  and  thui  it 
was  recognized  by  Justin  Martyr  and  the  Jlpostolicul  Constiiutio%h\ 
Sermon  on  forms',  &c,  j 


93 

the  mannt'i'  in  which  the  Psalms  are  used  in  tlie  ser- 
vice    "  with  all  their  localities    and  personalities   of 
meaning."     T!ie  Psalms  are  used  in  the  service  of  the 
church,  as  they  have  been  forai^es,  in  their  prophetical, 
evangelical,  or  spiritual  sense,  as  acts  of  [jraise.     Many 
of  them  have  had  their  application  to  man's  redemption 
settled,  isi  an  express  majiuer,  I)y  the  inspired  writers  ; 
audit  is  probable,  that  few,  or  none  of  them,  are  to  he 
restricted  to   temporal  events  and  occasions.     But  ^'  it 
may  be  asked,  are  we  concerned  with  the  affairs  of 
David  and  of  Israel  ?  Have  we  aiiy  thing  to  do  with  the 
ark  and  the   temple  ?  They  are  no   more.     Are   we  to 
go  up  to  Jemsalein,  and  to  uorsliipon  Sion  ?  They  are 
desolated  and  trodden  under  foot  by  tlie  Turks.    Are 
we  to  sacrifice  young  bullocks,  according  to  the  law? 
The  law  is  abolished  never  to  be  observed  again.     Do 
Ave  pray  for  victory  over  Zvloab,  Edom,  and  Philistia  ; 
or  for  deliverance   from  Babylon  ?  There  are  no  such 
nations,   no  such  places  in  the  world.     ^Vhat  then  do 
we  mean,  when,  taking  such  expressions  into  our  own 
mouths,  we  utter  them,  in  our  own  persons,  as  parts  of 
our  devotion  before  God  ?  Assuredly  we  must  mean  a 
Biiiritual  Jerusalem  and  Sion  ;  i\.  spiritual  ark  and  tem- 
ple ;  a  spiritual  law  ;  sijiritual  sacrifices  ;  and  spiritual 
enemies  ;  all  described  under  the  old  names,  wliich  are 
still  retained,  though  ^  old  things  are  passed  away  and 
all  things  are  to  become  ncvv/    Dy  substituting  Messiah 
for  David  ;  the  gospel  for  the  law  ;  the  church  Ctiristian, 
for  that  of  Israid  ;  and  the  enemies  of  the  one,  for  those 
of  the  other  ;  (lie  Psalms  are  made  our    own.     ]^i^ay, 
they  are,  with  more  fullness  and  propriety,  applied  now 
to  the  substanc^^  tlia»  they  were  of  old  to  ^  the  shadow 


94 

of  good  tilings  tlieii  to  come'  And  therefore,  ever 
since  the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era,  the  churcli 
hath  chosen  to  celebrate  the  gospel  mysteries  in  the 
words  of  these  ancient  hymns,  rather  than  to  compose, 
for  that  purpose,  new  ones  of  her  own."'  It  may  be 
proper  to  remark,  that  there  are  in  the  American  prayer 
book  selections  of  Psalms  which  may  be  used  instead  of 
those  appointed  for  the  day,  and  thus  these  localities 
and  personalities,  if  they  are  to  be  considered  such,  are 
easily  obviated.  The  use  of  Psalms  by  course,  is 
tliought  to  have  been  introduced  by  Ignatius  Bishop  of 
Antioch  in  the  apostolic  age.* 

The  next  grave  charge  is,  that  ^^  the  Episcopal  ser- 
Tice  appears  too  formal  to  cherish  the  spirit  of  devotion, 
and  too  pompous  to  be  a  fit  religious  homage.''  The 
first  assertion  is  somewhat  indefinite.  jVloro  or  less  of 
form  is  witnessed  among  all  Christian  denominations, 
and  we  are  not  aware  of  any  undue  excess  of  it  in  the 
church  service.  No  man  of  pious  feelings,  as  we  think, 
could  esteem  it  improper,  or  too  formal,  to  kneel  duri^iig 
prayer,  and  to  stand  during  praise,  and  all  classes  of 
Christians  sit  (hiring  instruction.  Neither  do  we  see 
any  very  strong  tendency  to  pomp  in  the  service.  The 
reader  will  seek  in  vain  through  the  prayer  book  for 
any  information  concerning  the  clerk,  and  he  will  seek 
equally  in  vain,  through  nine  in  ten,  at  least,  of  the 
Episcopal  churches  in  this  country  for  this  officer,  ex- 
cept, perhaps,  in  the  same  character  and  situation  as 
the  chorister  of  other  denominations.  The  wardens 
too,  are  but  temporal  officers  of  the  church,   and  are 

*  Bishop  Home's  Commentary   on  the  Psalms. — Frrfacc.     Se$ 
f^Tso  Hooker,  b.  v,  sec.  37.     Socrates  Ecc)       Hist.  L.  3.  c.  8. 


S5 

mentioned  but  ence  in  the  whole  prayer  book ;  and 
tiien  arc  morely  called  upon  to  collect  tlie  alms  of  tlie 
congregation  ;  a  duty  assigned,  \\t  believe;  by  thecongVe- 
gationalists,  and  others,  to  their  deacons,  who,  if  we  are 
not  mistaken,  generally  have  a  prominent  seat  in  the 
congregation, — wliile  this  is  so  rarely  the  case  with 
churcli  wardens  tiiat  we  do  not  recollect  ever  to  have  met 
"witli  more  than  half  a  dozen  instances.*  Congrega- 
tionalists  formerly  o])jected  to  both  the  gown  and  sur- 
plice, but,  since  they  have  adopted  the  identical  gown 
and  cassock  of  the  Episcopal  clergy,  we  hear  only  of 
the  change  of  dress  and  the  use  of  the  surplice.  At 
some  future  time,  doubtless,  these  objections,  will 
vanish  also.f  But  of  these  two  robes,  if  we  must  have 
but  one,  ice  decidedly  prefer  the  surplice,  because  it  is 
one  of  those  robes  w  hich  God  himself  appointed  for  the 

*  We  are   of  opinion  tkat  the  original  office   of  church  wardea 
has  been  divided,   by  the  Congregationahsts,  between  their  dea- 
cons and  tythingmen.     Some  of  them,  however,  retain  the  nmm 
of  church  warden  to  this  day>     See  Alden's  account  of  the  reh- 
I  gious   societies  of  Portsmouth,  N.  H.  p.  31.     Church  wardens  ia 
I  England,  if  we  are  not  mistaken,  and  in  some  parts  of  this  country, 
laswe    are  assured,  were  empowered  by  law  to  keep  the  peace 
I  about  the  premises  of  the  church  during  worship  j  hence,  probably, 
i  arose  the  us£  of  staves. 

I  t  We  are  inclined  to  believe  that  the  following  account  applies 
to  an  English  Unitarian  Chapel.  "  In  passing  a  place  of  worship 
«ome  time  since  which  had  the  appearance  of  an  Episcopal 
chapel,  I  entered,  and  found  the  fitting  up  of  the  interior,  the  ar- 
rangement of  the  communion  table,  with  the  clerk  and  reader's 
desks,  &c.  almost  precisely  the  same  as  I  had  been  accustomed  to 
see  in  chapels  of  ease  in  the  establishment.  The  Reader  also 
was  robed  in  a  aurpllce  and  frUe  ckrk  in  a  gown,  Giiristian  Obser- 
ver, vel.  IC.p.  493. 


dress  of  tlie  Jevyisb  priests, — Ijccausc  soloug  has  itsii-5C 
been  established  in  the  Christian  church, tliai  wc  cannot 
tell  when  it  was  introduced ;  and  because  it  is  cmbieJiiat- 
ical  of  the  ])iirity,  with  which  we  sliunUl  co-.uii  b;*rore 
God,  in  prayer  and  praise.*  Garments  of  o.Tice  niPvy 
certainly  be  considered  amosi;^  those  th]ii;^N  included  in 
the  apostle's  direction  to  tije  church  at  C'orinth,  to  '^^  let 
all  things  be  done  decently,  and  in  order."'  If  the  Re- 
viewer complains  that  the  performances  of  the  cluircli 
have  a  theatrical  air,  we  must  remind  him,  that  such 
airs  are  to  be  witnessed  in  places  and  on  occasions  wc 
eould  name  ;  not  formally  connected  vvU'i  thesu.  it  is 
true,  but  put  on,  apparently,  for  the  purji-ose  of  pppsonal 
disjdai/.  In  trnth,  when  we  consider  th;^  barrenness  of 
the  ceremonial,  allowed  by  sopae  denominations  of  pro- 
fessing Christians,  we  are  not  surprizevl  that  a  kind  of 

*  "  Jerome, — snys  Wheatloj^ — at  one  and  the  same  time  shows  it? 
ancient    use,   and   reproves   the  needless  scnipuiosity  of  such  as 
oppose  it."     Hooker  also,  quotes  Chrysostom,    as  alluding   to   its 
use.      Wheathij  says,  that  in  his  day,  the  only  clerical  garment  in 
general  use  was  the  surplice.     Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  in  his  commen- 
tary on  Exodus,  chap,  xxviii.  v.  2.  observes,  "  Should  not  the  gar- 
ments of  all  those  who  minister  in  sacred  things,  still  be  emblemati- 
cal of  the  things  in  which  they  minister  ?  Should  they  not  be  for 
glory  and  beauty,  expressive  of  the  dignity  of  the  gospel  ministry, 
and  that  beauty  of  holiness  without  which  none  can  see  the  Lord  ? 
As  the  high-priesfs  vestments  under  the  law,  were  emblematical  of 
what  a-cfs  io  come,  should  not  the  vestments  of  the  ministers  of  the 
gospel  bear  some  resemblance  to  that  which  is  come?  The  white  sur-  j 
plicc  in  the  service  of  the  church,is  almost  the  only  thing  that  remains  '. 
of  those  ancient  and  becoming  vestments  which  God  commanded  to  ^' 
be  made  for  glory  and  beauty.     Clothing  emblematic  of  office,  is  of  i 
more  consequence  than  is  generally  imagined,"     Let  it  be  remem- 
bered Dr.  Clarke  is  an  English  dissenter. 


97 

iiecessity  is  di<!covere(l  to  exist,  for  the  exercise  of  all 
the  little  arts  which  are  found  to  produce  attention. 
Men,  as  we  have  before  intimated,  are  swayed  through 
their  senses.  It  is  through  this  medium  that  learned 
and  unlearned  are  alike  affected.  This  is  evident  from 
the  practice  of  all  who  arc  desirous  of  influencing  popu- 
lar assemblies,  and  none  make  greater  use  of  it  than  our 
opponents.  For  tliis  reason  a  sensible  worship  is  ne- 
cessary, and  upon  this  principle  are  the  services  of  the 
church  arranged.  A  form  tending  to  edification  and 
instruction,  with  a  few  simple  ceremonies,  but  without 
offensive  parade,  is  easily  reconciled  to  the  feelings  of 
all,  even  of  those  who  have  been  accustomed  to  ^^  the 
simplicity  of  congregational  worship,^'  if  they  are  not 
possessed  of  incurable  prejudices  on  the  subject,  and  are 
not  fully  convinced  they  should  be  hearers  of  prayer 
only.* 

*  We  will  g-ivfi  the  statement  of  Justin  Martyr  from  another 
source  than  Neal,  of  whose  impartiality  as  an  historian  Bishop  Mad- 
dox  and  Dr.  Gray  have  given  abundant  reason  to  doubt  in  many 
respects.  Writing  to  the  heathen  Emperor,  in  vindication  of  the 
persecuted  Christians,  he  speaks  in  ageneral  way  of  their  mode  of 
worship,  thus  :  "  Upon  Sunday  all  those  who  live  in  cities,  or  coun- 
try towns,  or  viliages  meet  together,  and  the  writings  of  the 
apostles  and  prophets  are  read,  as  the  time  will  allow.  And  the 
reader  being  ended,  the  President  (Sir  Peter  King  says,  the  Bishop) 
,  deUvers  a  discourse,  instructing  and  exhorting  to  an  imitation  of 
I  those  things  which  are  comely.  We  then  all  rise  up,  and  pour 
out  prayers.  And  as  we  have  related,  prayers  being  ended,  bread 
and  wine  and  water  are  brought,  and  the  President  as  above  gives 
I  thanks  with  all  his  power,,  and  the  people  signify  their  approbation 
by  saying  amen.  Distribution  is  then  made  to  every  one  that  has 
joined  in  giving  thanks  ;  and  to  those  who  are  absent  it  is  sent  by 
the  deacons." — Apology.  Iq  the  same  work  he  speaks  incidentallj' 
13 


98 

We  do  not  feel  ourselves  called  to  defend  what  may 
be  done,  or  omitted  to  be  done,  in  the  protestant  Cathe- 
dral of  Canada ;  but  we  should  like  to  be  told  upon 
what  ground  it  is  tliat  the  Reviewer  brings  forward  as 
belonging  to  the  l^jpiscojjol  system^  ceremonies  and 
practices  which  are  no  more  connected  with  it  necessari- 
ly than  they  are  with  Congregationalism  ;  and  to  find 
authority  for  which,  he  will  search  all  the  offices  of  the 
church  in  vain.  Were  it  not  that  the  assertion  is  gener- 
al and  unlimited  that  "^  some  of  the  ceremonies  of  the 
churcli  are  fantastic  beyond  all  but  popish  examples," 
"\ve  would  suppose,  that  it  referred  only  to  Canadian 
practices.  •  As  it  is,  we  reply  to  it  in  the  words  of 
Hooker  ; — ^^Such  speeches  are  scandalous  ;  they  savour 
not  of  God  in  him  that  useth  them  ;  and  unto  virtuously 
disposed  minds  they  are  grievous  corrosives.  Our 
case  were  miserable,  if  tliat,  wherewith  we  most  en- 
deavour to  please  God,  were  in  his  sight  so  vile  and 
despicable  as  men's  disdaiiiful  speech  would  make  it."^ 
Whatever  may  have  been  the  character  of  the  poetry 
used  at  the  consecration  of  the  Bishops  at  Dublin  in 
1660,  we  have  read  with  much  pleasure  the  prose  de- 
livered on  that  occasion  by  Bishop  Jeremy  Taylor  5 
and  if  our  readers  w  ill  take  the  trouble  to  peruse  it  they 
will  find  proofs  of  the  substantial  base  on  which  Epis- 
copacy rests, — too  strong  to  be  removed  by  the  compara- 

of  the  Common  Prayers.  Several  thing's  are  deserving  of  notice 
in  this  extract :  the  President  or  Bishop  had  an  assistant, — the 
reader, — the  deacons  were  employed  in  a  duty  additional  to  that 
which  was  assigned  them  at  their  original  institution  ;  (Acts  6.) 
the  scriptures  were  read  in  their  public  worship, — and  the  people 
pined  audibly  in  it. 
*  Book  V.  sec.  33. 


99 

lively  pigmy  efforts  of  the  Reviewer.*  But  we  do  not 
recollect  ever  to  have  met  with  a  more  gross  perversion 
of  aijy  writer  than  is  fomul  iu  this  Reviewer's  assertion 
t!iat ''  the.  Homily  on  the  time  and  place  of  prayer  ex- 
2iressly  condemns  chanting  and  playing  on  the  organ  as 
sorely  displeasing  to  Giodj  and  filthily  defiling  his  holy 
house.*'  Ignorance  is  the  only  refuge  we  can  allow  him, 
for  he  does  not  appear  to  have  known  that,  prior  to  tlie 
introduction  of  the  common  prayer,  the  popish  service 
had  heeu  wholly  chanted,  accompanied  by  the  organ  ; 
so  that,  as  in  the  service  of  some  modern  sectaries,  the 
many  were  entertained  with  the  skill  of  the  few  ; — there 
were  no  prayers  ;  no  actual  devotion.  The  Homily  al- 
luded to  was  set  forth  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  at  a 
time  when  this  abuse  of  organs  was  purged  away,  ])iit 
their  sober  use  laudably  retained.  Speaking  of  '^  Avick- 
€d  people  who  pass  nothing  to  resort  to  church, — for 
that  they  see  the  church  altogether  scoured  of  such  gay 
gazing  sights,  as  their  gross  fantasy  was  greatly  delight- 
ed with, — as  may  appear  by  this,  that  a  woman  said  to  her 
neighbour,  ^  alas.  Gossip,  what  shall  we  do  at  church, 
since  all  the  saints  are  taken  away,  since  all  the  goodly 
sights  we  were  wont  to  have  are  gone,  since  we  cannot 
hear  the  like  piping,  and  singing,  chanting,  and  playing 
on  the  organs  that  we  could  before  ?'  But  dearly  be- 
loved, we  ought  greatly  to  rejoice,  and  give  God  thanks, 
that  those  things  which  displeased  God  so  sore,  and 
filthily  defiled  his  holy  house  and  place  of  prayer  for 
tlie  which  he  hath  justly  destroyed  many  nations,  ac- 
cording to  the  saying  of  St.  Paul,  ^  If  any  man  defile 
thetemjjle  of  God,  God  will  him  destroy.^   And  this  w& 

*  See  Jeremy  Taylor's  Sermons,  Boston  ed.  vol.  3.  p.  96.^ 


100 

ought  greatly  to  praise  God  for,  that  such  superstitions  and 
idolatrous  manners  as  were  utterly  naught,  and  defaced 
God's  glory,  are  utterly  abolished,  as  they  most  justly 
deserved  :  and  yet  those  things  that  either  God  was 
honoured  with,  or  his  people  edified,  are  decently  re- 
tained, and  in  our  churches  comely  practised."*  Now 
it  is  an  undoubted  fact,  that  the  use  of  organs  as  an 
accompaniment  to  the  singing  or  chanting  of  Psalms, 
was  at  that  time  retained  iu  the  churches  in  which  this 
Homily  was  appointed  to  be  read. 

We  might  pass  over  his  remark  that  ^^  tlie  feasts  and 
fasts  in  the  observance  of  which  Christians  find  so  much 
satisfaction,  were  introduced  to  conciliate  pagans," 
sheltering  ourselves  under  its  general  application.  But 
"we  are  not  willing  so  to  pass  his  quotation  from  the  amia- 
ble Theodoret  for  the  support  of  an  opinion  which  we 
believe  never  entered  into  the  head  of  the  good  father. 
We  should  judge  from  the  specimens  which  increase 
upon  us  as  we  advance,  that  the  Reviewer  was  acquiring 
a  fondness  for  the  ancient  fathers,  at  least  when  he 
thinks  they  will  serve  his  purpose.  He  lias  quoted 
Jerome,  Justin,  TertuUian  and  now  Theodoret  !  Yet 
these  writers  lived  in  that  period  of  antiquity,  in  which 
he  accuses  Episcopalians  of  calling  in  ignorant  and  un- 
w  orthy  Ecclesiastics  as  their  allies  !  Does  this  savour 
much  of  sound  education ;  to  reject  them,  with  con- 
tumely, when  they  are  found  too  strong  for  him,  and  to 
receive  them  humbly,  when  they  can  be  brought  to  fight 
on  his  side  ?  We  must  be  permitted  to  doubt  it.  But ; 
this  is  not  the  first  time  that  this  extract  has  been  brought 
up  with  the  view  of  casting  a  stigma  on  the  church. 

*  Homilies,  Oxford  and  New. York  ed.  p.  294, 


101 

It  is  taken,  we  believe,  from  the  eighth  of  Theodoret's 
twelve  discourses,  against  tlie  false  opinions  of  the 
heathen,  "  which  he  wrote,  says  Dupin,  to  satisfy  some 
objections  which  had  been  made  to  him.  In  this  book 
lie  undertakes  to  defend  the  honour  which  Christians 
gave  to  the  martyrs,  shewing  by  the  testimony  of  their 
philosophers,  poets,  and  historians,  that  the  Greeks  had 
honoured  the  memory  of  eminent  men  by  offering  sacri- 
fice to  them  after  their  death,  and  by  bestowing  on  them 
the  qualities  of  gods,  demi-gods,  and  heroes,  although 
the  greatest  part  of  them  had  been  infamous  and  crimi- 
nals :  and  this  he  does  to  give  them  a  clearer  demon- 
stration, that  the  Christians  did  honour  their  martyrs 
far  more  deservedlij.^''^'  This  seems  to  us  to  be  very 
much  in  the  nature  of  a  triumph  on  the  part  of  Theodovet 
against  some  such  objector  as  Mr.  Sparks,  or  the  He- 
viewer. 

The  next  grave  charge, ^ — and,  if  it  has  any  basis,  it  is 
a  very  grave  one, — is  that  »^  the  Episcopal  service,  au- 
thorises a  rite  not  christian.^'  This  term  seems  to  have 
been  selected  with  some  care,  but  it  does  not  sufficiently 
cover  the  intention.  A  rite  has  prevailed,  we  cannot 
say  precisely  how  long,  among  the  congregationalists  of 
New-England,  called,  owning  the  covenant,  which  is 
used,  we  believe,  when  any  person  desires  to  be  received 
into  full  communion,  and  which  is  like,  very  like  indeed, 
so  far  as  we  understand  it,  to  confirmation,  saving  that 
the  minister  does  not  impose  his  hands  upon  the  candi- 
date, from  an  apprehension,  2jrobablyy  that  it  would  be 
not  christian.     Notwithstanding  this  usage,  however, 

*  Dupin's  Eccles.  Hist.  Life  ofTheodoret.     Century  fifth. 


102 

>ve  are  told  that  confirmation  has  no  decent  sJiow  of 
scriptural  evidence  ;  and  a  text  or  two  of  scripture  is 
adduced  by  the  Reviewer  as  having  no  cojinection  with 
the  subject,  wliich,  really,  we  do  not  recollect  ever  to 
have  seen  quoted  in  its  favour  ;  and  which,  we  suspect, 
is  brought  forward  now,  simply  because  it  contained  the 
word  whicli  modern  use  has  claimed  for  the  name  of  the 
rite  as  best  expressing  its  object.  We,  at  least,  can  dis- 
cern no  other  grounds  for  it.  There  certainly  are,  in 
our  opinion,  texts  of  scripture,  which,  as  far  as  needful 
for  humble  faith,  speak  of  confirmation  as  a  rite  used 
by  the  apostles  and  beneficial  to  the  church.  The  sixth 
chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  opeus  with  the 
following  passage,  which,  the  Reviewer  ought  to  have 
known,  is  couaiuered  an  important  testimony  to  the 
early  and  continued  use  of  confirmation. — "•  Therefore 
leaving  the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  let  us 
go  on  unto  perfection  ;  not  laying  again  the  foundation  of 
repentance  from  dead  works,  and  cf  faith  towards  God, 
of  the  doctrine  of  baptisms  and  oflaijing  on  of  hands,  and 
of  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  of  eternal  judgement.'' 
Now  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  expression, — laying  on 
of  hands,  here  ranked  among  the  principles  of  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ  ?  It  is  obviously  something  of  general 
interest  to  Christians,  for  it  is  part  of  a  system,  of  uni- 
versal application  to  them.  The  position  of  ilie  doctrine 
is  worthy  of  notice.  It  is  laid  down  witli  the  otliers  in 
the  precise  order  of  their  effect  upon  the  Christian  life. 
Still  however,  standing,  as  it  does,  abstracted  from  any 
unequivocal  guide  to  its  meaning,  we  can  only  learn 
what  we  are  to  understand  by  it,  by  referring  to  other 
parts  of  scripture,  and  thus  ascei'taiuing  the  practice  in  the 


103 

lase.  And  here  we  are  to  rememljer  that  the  apostles 
addressed  their  epistles  to  churches,  v.hich,  having  often 
perliaps,  witnessed  their  practice  in  Christian  duties, 
needed  not  to  be  minutely  informed,  as  to  what  they  had 
already  seen.  Doubiless  this  was  the  case  in  the  in- 
stance before  ns.  In  tlie  eiglith  chapter  of  Acts,  we 
read  of  Philip's  going  down  to  Samaria  where  he 
preached  the  gospel,  and  baptised  :  when  the  apostles 
heard  this,  "they  sent  thither  Peter  and  John,  who,  when, 
they  were  come  down,  prayed  for  them  tliat  they  might 
receive  tlie  Holy  Chost  (for  as  yet  he  was  fallen  upon 
none  of  them,  only  they  were  baptized  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  Jesus.)  Tljen  laid  they  their  ijands  on  them, 
and  they  received  tlie  Holy  G'host.''  The  apostles 
hear  that  Philip  had  made  converts  in  Samaria,  and 
they  forthwith  send  two  of  t!ieir  own  number  to  them, — 
for  what  purpose?  To  lay  thp.ir  hands  on  Ihem 
fur  their  confirmation  in  llie  faith,  and  that  ilicy  ujight 
receive  the  Holy  Ghosl.  We  know  that  when  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  mentioned  in  scripture  it  implies,- 
generallij,  aw  extraordinary  gift,  yet  it  docs  not  always 
mean  the  same  thing.  In  the  case  of  the  Samaritans 
we  have  7io  ground  to  suppose  that  tlieir  gifts  were  of  an 
extraordinary  class.  That  it  did  not  give  them  power 
to  convey  to  others  what  they  had  received  is  plain  from 
the  oiler  of  Simon  Magus  (o  buy  it  with  money,  and  it  h 
equally  plain  that  the  apostles  did  possess  this  power- 
Whatever  may  l;avebeen  the  nature  of  this  gift  it  wa-? 
certainly  an  establishment  of  their  baptism  into  Christ 
and.  an  acknowledgement  of  their  being  admitted  to  « 
participation  in  the  faith.  Some  years  after  this  Pawl 
arriving  at  Kphesii^,  found  there  certain  disciples  v.'hry 


104 

had  received  John's  baptism.  He  asked  them  whether 
they  had  received  the  Holy  Ghost  since  they  believed  ? 
but  they  had  not  so  much  as  heard  whether  there  were 
any  Holy  Giiost.  They  were  then  baptised,  after 
which  "  Paul  laid  Ms  hands  on  them,  and  they  spake 
with  tongues  and  prophesied.''  Here  the  gifts  are  ex- 
pressly mentioned,  but  they  were  attendant,  as  before, 
on  the  laying  on  of  hands  ;  they  were  not  even  a  conse- 
quence of  the  subjects  of  them  being  rebaptised  in  the 
presence,  if  not  by  the  liands  of  an  apostle  ;  and  this, 
we  think,  sufficiently  marks  the  importance  of  the  rite.* 
From  the  circumstance  that  these  acts  are  incidentally 
mentioned,  and  from  the  importance  which  seems  to  be 
intrinsically  attached  to  them,  we  suppose  we  may 
fairly  infer  that  the  laying  on  of  hands,  was  generally, 
if  not  universally,  practised  by  the  apostles.  The  Re- 
viewer, Avith  his-  accustomed  confidence,  asserts  the  per- 
fect accuracy  of  the  remark  of  Mr.  Sparks  that  these 
instances  of  laying  on  of  hand-*  always  imply,  either  "  a 
communication  of  extraordinary  gifts,  or  induction  to 
some  office."  The  last  is  not  pretended  to  attach  to 
either  of  the  instances  we  have  produced,  and  we  allow 
that  in  the  instance  at  Ephesus  the  gifts  were  certainly 
extraordinary,  but  we  think  that  even  the  lieviewer  is 
not  willing  to  have  it  supposed  that  the  whole  body  of 
believers  in  Samaria,  including  Simon  Magus,  were  on 
the  same  footing.  There  is,  at  least,  no  authority  for 
it.  In  the  very  city,  and  about  the  very  time,  when 
Paul  imposed  his  hands  as  above,  he  tells  his  Co- 
rinthian converts  in  his  first  Epistle  to  them,  (chap,  xii) 


*  In  the  instance  of  our  Saviour  the  Holy  Ghost  descended  upoa 
h\\Xi  at  his  baptism.    Matthew  iii.  16. 


I 


105 

that  though  ^*  the  manifestation  of  the  spirit  is  given  to 
every  man  to  profit  withal,"  yet,  ^'  there  are  diversities 
of  gifts/'  and  ^»  tliere  are  different  administrations," 
and  "there  are  diversities  of  operations."  "'For  to  one 
is  given  by  the  spirit  the  word  of  wisdom  ;  to  another 
the  ivord  of  knowleds;^  by  the  same  spirit  ;  to  anotlier 
faith  by  the  same  spirit,"  &c.  Of  all  the  gifts  men- 
tioned, that  wliich,  perliaps,  was  most  general,  because 
most  necessary,  jvas  a  confiding  faith  in  the  gospel ; 
and  by  the  gifts  of  the  word  of  Avisdom  and  tlie  word  of 
knowledge,  is,  doubtless,  to  be  understood  the  ability  to 
perceive  and  understand  the  gospel  of  Jesus.  These 
gifts  were  necessary  then,  and  they,  doubtless,  are  so 
now,  but  if  these  are  to  be  called  the  extraordinary  gifts 
of  the  spirit,  what,  we  should  like  to  be  told,  are  his 
ordinary  gifts  ? 

We  think  now,  that  it  is  evident,  that  the  imposition 
of  the  hands  of  the  apostles  in  the  two  instances  men- 
tioned in  tiie  book  of  Acts,  must  have  been  the  same 
rite  which,  in  the  Kpistle  to  the  Hebrews,  is  ranked 
among  the  principles  of  tlie  doctrine  of  Christ. 

We  may  be  told,  however,  that,  admitting  such  a  rite 
to  have  been  used  when  extraordinary  means  were  ne- 
cessary for  the  promulgation  of  the  gospel,  and  as  evi- 
dence of  its  truth, — when  that  necessity  had  ceased  to 
exist,  or  rather  when  the  use  of  extraordinary  means 
ceased,  this  rite  had,  of  course,  no  farther  operation. 
Wti  have  shown  above,  that  it  is  doubtful,  at  least, 
wiiether  its  original  institution  was  for  extraordinary 
purposes  only,  and  we  are  of  opinion  that  this  argument, 
if  admitted,  bears  equally  hard  against  Christianity  in 
its  whole  extent. 
14 


106 

As  the  Reviewer  has  quoted  two  of  the  ancient  fatk- 
ers  to  show  the  mode  of  worship  prevailing  in  their  day, 
and  anotlier,  with  a  view  to  the  destruction  of  Episco- 
pacy, we  suppose  we  may  be  allowed  to  produce  their 
testimony  to  show,  that  the  practice  of  the  primitive 
church  was  in  favour  of  this  rite.  Tertullian  says 
*^  that  after  baptism  succeeds  laying  on  of  hands, 
with  prayer,  calliuij;  for  and  invoking  the  Holy  Spirit;" 
and  Jerome,  "  as  for  those  who  are  baptised  afar  oft*  in 
the  lesser  towns  by  presbyters  and  deacons,  the  Bishop 
travels  out  to  them,  to  lay  hands  on  them,  and  to  invoke 
the  Holy  Spirit.''  Again :  "  if  you  ask  where  it  is 
written,  it  is  written  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  :  but  if 
there  were  no  authority  in  scripture  for  it,  yet  the  consent 
of  all  the  world  in  this  particular  is  instead  of  a  com- 
mautl."*  There  can  be  no  room  for  doubt,  then, 
that  the  practice  was  begun  by  the  Apostles,  and  con- 
tinued by  their  successors. 

Confirmation,  in  its  modern  use,  is  the  solemn  laying* 
of  the   hands  of  the  Bishop  upon  such  as   have  been 

*  Whoever  wishes  to  see  the  numerous  testimonies  of  the  best 
and  most  ancient  writers  on  this  subject,  may  find  great  collections 
©f  them  made  by  Dr.  Jackson,  Dr.  Hammond,  Dr.  Comber,  and 
ether  divines  of  our  own  church.  Many  foreign  divines,  since  the 
Reformation,  have  judiciously  cleared  it,  as  Calvin,  Chemnitius, 
Paraeus,  Rivetus,  Casaubon,  and  others.  And  it  has  also  been  as- 
serted, and  recommended  by  some  considerable  English  writers, 
who  have  not  in  all  things  agreed  with  us  in  the  matter  of  church 
government,  as  we  see  in  Hanmer's  Exercitation,  and  Baxter''s 
Treatise  on  the  subject,  in  which  they  greatly  lament  the  disuse 
of  it  as  a  thing  of  pernicious  consequence  to  the  Christian  religion.'* 
— Pastoral  Advice.  See  also  Owen's  Commentary  on  th«  He- 
brews, c.  ri.  V.  §. 


107 

bnpiised  and  are  coine  to  years  of  discretion.  It  is, 
as  we  have  before  said,  a  confirmation  on  his  part  of  tlieir 
admission  to  churcii  membership,  and  on  theirs,  the 
confirmation,  or  assumption  of  the  vows  of  baptism. 
It  is  not  pretended  that  the  i>ishops  have  the  power  of 
conveying  the  Holy  Ghost  ;  and  yet  we  humbly  trust 
that  the  proper  use  of  this  ordinance  will  make  it  sub- 
servient to  the  spiritual  edification  and  advancement  of 
those  M'ho  receive  it. 

'i  he  Reviewer  next  objects  to  some  expressions  in 
the  form  of  administration,  which  we  can  pardon  him 
for  misunderstanditjg,  since  others,  with  better  motives, 
have  done  so  before  him.  We  conceive  we  shall  best 
explain  them  in  the  language  of  Archbishop  Seeker, 
*•  The  commemoration  sets  forth  that  Gud  hath  regener- 
ated his  servants  by  water  and  the  Holy  Ghost ^  that  is, 
entitled  them  by  baptism  to  the  enlivening  influences  of 
the  Spirit,  and  so,  as  it  were,  begotten  them  again  into 
a  state  inexpressibly  happier  than  their  natural  one  ; 
a  covenant  state,  in  which  God  will  consider  them 
while  they  keep  their  engageuients  with  peculiar  love  as 
his  dear  children.  It  follows  that  he  hatli  given  them 
forgiveness  of  all  their  sins,  meaning,  that  he  hath 
given  them  assurance  of  it  upon  the  gracious  terms  of" 
the  gospel.  But  that  every  one  of  them  hath  actually 
received  it  by  complying  with  those  terms  since  he 
sinned  last,  though  we  may  charitably  hope,  we  cannot 
ipresume  to  affirm  ;  nor  were  these  words  intended  to 
iaffirm  it,  as  the  known  doctrine  of  the  church  of  Eng- 
iland  fully  proves.  And  therefore,  let  no  one  misunder- 
stand this  expression,  which  hath  parallel  ones  in  the 


lOS 

New-Testament,*  so  as  either  to  censure  it,  or  to  delude, 
himself  with  a  fatal  imagination  that  any  thing  said 
over  him  can  possibly  convey  to  him  a  pardon  of  sins 
for  wliich  he  is  not  truly  penitent.  AV^e  only  acknov/- 
ledge  with  due  thankfulness  that  God  hath  donehispart, 
but  which  of  the  congregation  have  done  theirs,  their 
own  consciences  must  determine."!  The  remark  of 
the  Reviewer  concerning  tlie  slender  preparation  ne- 
cessary to  the  participation  in  this  rite,  we  have  before 
shown  to  be  unfounded.  The  candidates  for  con- 
firmation are  required  to  understand  the  nature  of  the 
baptismal  vow,  which  they  then  assume,  and  for  this 
purpose  are,  at  the  least,  to  be  sufficiently  instructed 
in  it,  and  the  very  nature  of  the  institution  supposes 
them  capable  of  making  a  prudent  and  firm  resolution 
for  observing  it. 

The  next  charge  of  the  Reviewer,  and  one  which  we 
take  to  be  the  strong  hold  of  some  feiv  of  the  Sons 
of  the  Puritans  is,  that  the  Liturgy  involves  false 
doctrine  ;  meaning  that  he  and  his  party  so  esteem  it. 
He  Avould  have  us,  it  seems,  strike  from  the  Liturgy 
every  expression  which  savours  of  doctrine,  lest,  unhap- 
pily, we  should  be  found  so  ungracious,  as  ^'  to  try  one 
owho  comes  to  put  himself  on  our  Christian  hospitality 
by  a  doctrinal  shihhulethy  It  is  nothing  to  the  pur-, 
pose,  for  instance,  that  we,  Trinitarians,  deem  it  our 
duty  to  pray  to  Jesus  Christ,  as  our  God  and  Saviour, 
and  i\mi  Jlrians  deem  it  their  duty  to  ascribe  ^^  blessing 
and  honour,  and  glory  and  power  to  him  that  sitteth  on 
the  Throne,  and  to  the  Lamb  forever  and  ever."  lliese 
conceptions  of  duty  on  our  part  are  to  be  set  aside  by 

*Ephes.  i.  7.  Col.  i.  14. 
t  Sermon  on  Confirmation. 


109 

UP,  because  Unitarians  say,  that,  considering  Jesua 
Cijrist  uS  a  man,  it  is  contrary  to  tlicir  duty  to  oiler  him 
any  sort  of  hoaia2;e.  There  seem  to  be  then  three 
distinct  opinions  upon  this  subject,  and  it  is  no  greater 
oflence  ag.iinst  liberality  for  us  to  adhere  to  our  opinion 
than  for  the  Utiitarian  or  tiic  Arian  to  adliere  to  iiis. 
It  is  to  no  purpose  that  the  Unitarian  tells  us  his  method 
would  coaiprisc  all  ;  it  would  not  do  so  without  the 
tacii  abandonment  of  duty  in  the  others.  iJesides  the 
Dtist  :nii;ht,  with  as  great  propriety,  make  use  of  tiie 
saaie  argument. 

There  can  be  no  doubt,  we  think,  that  every  reli- 
gious community  have  a  perfect  right  to  preserve  in 
their  M orship,  or  in  any  otlicr  reasonable  Avay,  such 
fundamental  doctrines  as  they  believe  may  be  fairly 
drawn  from  the  scriptures.  To  this,  ice  think,  none 
but  the  capricious,  and  the  uncharitable,  can  object. 
And,  v,e  further  think,  that  tliose  who  do  object  to  it, 
afler  having  placed  themselves  at  an  irreconcileable 
distance,  are  justly  lialde  to  the  charge  of  making  a 
gross  attack  on  Christian  liberty. 

But  let  us  examine  this  suijject  a  little  closer.  ^*  The 
doors  of  our  sanctuaries  are  open, — to  use  the  language 
of  the  late  Mr.  Buckminster, — to  the  infidel  as  well  as 
to  the  believer,  to  the  Jew  and  to  the  Pagan,  to  the  Ma- 
iiometan  from  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean  and  to 
the  savage  from  the  banks  of  the  Missouri."  Surely, 
the  Reviewer  would  not  extend  his  comprehensive 
scheme  so  far  as  to  include  all  these  classes,  and  yet 
why,  should  he  not?  The  distinguishing  points  lie- 
tween  his  creed  and  some  of  theirs,  may  not  be  greater 
or  more  insuperable  than  those  between  Episcopalians 


110 

and  Unitarians.     Pope  lias  a  prayer  of  this  comprehen- 
sive cast  ready  prepared  to  our  hands. 

Father  of  all  !  in  every  age, 

In  every  clime  adored, 
By  saint,  by  savage,  or  by  sage, 

Jehovah,  Jove,  or  Lord,  &c. 

But  we  will  give  tiie  Reviewer  the  credit  of  our  be- 
jtief,  that  he  would  stop  much  short  of  this  point.  He 
"wishes,  we  will  suppose,  such  prayer  as  will  contain 
nothing  offensive  to  believers  in  the  gospel.  Admitting 
the  principle,  would  he  be  able  to  prepare,  extempora- 
neously, as  his  thoughts  roll  on,  a  prayer  so  critically 
correct  as  to  leave  no  room  for  objectious  on  this  score  ? 
If  so,  he  must  have  a  mind  unusually  well  disciplined, 
and  remarkably  free  from  the  recollection  of  Jiis  private 
studies.  But  the  j^rincijde  is  a  fallacious  one.  We 
have  produced  an  instance  or  two  above.  We  will 
now  adduce  another.  There  is  a  sect  of  Christians 
called  Friends,  who,  quiet  and  unobtrusive,  make  but 
few  claims  to  the  notice  of  society  at  large  ;  who,  what- 
ever may  be  the  errors  of  their  system,  are  not  justly 
chargeable  with  that  fundamental  one  of  "  denying  the 
Lord  that  bought  them  ;"  and  who  openly  worsliip 
God  after  their  own  manner.  And  yet  we  believe  that 
the  Reviewer  would  find  not  a  little  difficulty  in  accom- 
modating his  very  accommodating  plan  to  their  princi- 
ples, even  in  such  a  degree  only  as  to  make  them  willing 
to  be  hearers  of  his  prayers.  On  the  other  hand,  we 
<lo  not  suppose,  tliat  he  would  be  willing  to  modify  his 
own  scheme  so  far  as  to  adopt  their  method.  We 
should  suppose  that  it  required  only  plain  common 
sense  to  perceive  that  it  is  literally  impracticable  in  the 


Ill- 

present  state  of  the  Cliristian  world  to  adopt  such  a 
method  of  worsliip  as  should  be  perfectly  unexccptioii^ 
able  to  all  who  call  tiicmsolves  Christians.  The 
scheme  is  perfectly  Utoj)ian ;  it  seems  however  to  answer 
very  well  to  linir  {i<e  changes  oi' liberality  upon.  After 
al!,  tliere  is  perhaps  no  system  in  which  persons  of 
various  shades  of  belief  could  meet  to  so  much  advan- 
tage as  in  the  Episcopal  cliurch  ;  her  doctrines  are  sub- 
stantially the  doctrines  of  the  far  greater  portion  of 
Christendom  ;  and  the  worshipper  may  select  before 
hand  the  prayers  to  which  liis  mind  does  not  assent, 
thus  precluding  embarrassment.  We,  for  our  own 
part,  admire  the  wisdom  which  wrought  the  doctrines 
OF  THE  Cross  into  the  service  of  her  altars,  "  like 
raiment  of  needle  work,"  and  we  bless  God  that  he  hais 
preserved  to  us,  our  Liturgy,  when,  like  the  ark,  it  was 
surrounded  by  Philistine  hosts  ;  and  in  other,  and  later 
times,  wiien  Uzzahs  would  stretch  forth  their  feeble 
hands  to  better  its  condition. 

1.  The  first  instance  of  y?//se  doctrine  is,  tliat   the 
Trinity  is  supposed  in  several  places  in  tlic  Liturgy.* 

*  With  regard  to  the  truth  or  falsity  of  this  doctrine  let  ns  notice 
the  opinion  of  a  Jew  ;  of  course  an  unbiassed  witness.  Mr.  Levi, 
in  his  published  correspondence  with  Dr.  Priestley,  quoted  in 
Adam''s  Religious  World  displayed  (vol.  ii.  p.  204)  says,  that  "  the 
divinity  of  Christ, — his  pre-cxistence  and  power  to  abrogate  the 
ceremonial  part  of  the  law  ;  as  also  the  miraculous  conception 
are  all  taught  in  the  gospels ;  and  the  ceremony  just  mentioned 
[baptism]  points  out  the  essential  qualification  of  a  Christian  :  con- 
sequently he  that  does  not  believe  the  doctrine  of  the  Triuity,  cannot 
be  a  Christian,  if  the  Gospels  be  true.''' — Letters  to  Dr.  Priestley. 
1789,  p.  21.  To  the  same  effect  is  the  opinion  of  a  learned 
Deist  as  given  by  Bishop  Burnet  [History  of  his  own  Times,  v^!- 


112 

Doubtless:  it  is  not  only  svipposed,  but  is  plainly  assert- 
ed, in  more  than  one  place.  The  Liturgy  too  requires 
worship  to  be  addressed  to  our  Saviour,  "f/ie  Lamb  of 
Gi)d  who  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world."'  In  these 
respects  the  Episcopal  church  throughout  the  world  U 
not  alone.  ^Umo-st  universallyj  wherever  the  name  of 
Christ  is  knovrn,  praiier  is  made  ever  unto  him,  and 
daily  is  he  jiraispd.  Even  Trinitarians  are  not  singu- 
lar in  this  last  respect.  The  ^'  most  judicious"  Arians 
in  former,  and  later  times,  if  not  their  entire  body,  have 
deemed  themselves  required  by  the  scriptures  to  tvor- 
sJiip  Christ/'^     Tliese  points  are  common  to  almost  all 

ii.  p.  212.]  "  When  in  1898,  one  Firmin  undertook  to  distribute 
tracts  against  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  (which,  Smollet  says, 
abounded  at  this  time,  and  took  their  rise  from  the  licentiousness 
and  proiiigacy  of  the  times)  many  undertook  to  write  in  this  con- 
troversy, some  of  whom  were  not  fitted  for  handhng  so  nice  a  sub- 
ject. A  learned  Deist  made  a  severe  remark  on  the  progress  of 
(his  dispute  ; — He  said  he  was  sure  the  divines  would  be  too  hard 
for  tlie  Socinians  in  proving  their  doctrines  out  of  scripture  ;  but 
if  the  doctrine  could  once  he  laughed  at^  and  rejected  as  absurd,  then 
its  being  proved  how  well  soever  out  of  scripture,  would  turn  to 
be  an  argument  against  the  scriptures  themselves,  as  containing 
such  incredible  doctrines."  Our  opponents  we  believe  have 
reached  his  premises,  and,  unwittingly,  v/e  doubt  not,  are  rapidly 
travelling  to  his  conclusions. 

*  Whiston,  Samuel  Clarke,  Emlyn,  Chandler,  Benson,  Pierce, 
Grove,  and  in  short  all  the  most  eminent  Arians  have  been  wor- 
shippers of  Christ.  Carpenter  compiled  in  1793,  a  Liturgy  for 
the  use  of  his  congregation.  In  thf;  advertisement  prefixed  he 
says,  "  I  think  it  right,  in  our  public  worship  to  pray  to  the  Father 
only  in  the  name  of  Christ.  But  as  praise  is  certainly  ascribed  to 
him  in  the  scriptures,  and  as  love  to  Christ  is  made  an  essential 
branch  ©f  his  religion,  1  cannot  but  think  we  are  justified  in  ad- 
dressing him    with  hymns  of  praise   and  thanksgiving  "     In  the 


113 

dasses  of  Christians,  and  as  we  have  limited  ourselves 
ill  these  strictures  to  Episcopal  peculiarities,  we  thiuk 
it  unnecessary  to  enlarge  on  these  topics  here. 

2.  If  the  popish  error  of  the  real  presence  is  not  dis- 
countenanced in  the  parts  of  sentences  which  he  has 
so  disingenuously  quoted,  yet  he  has  not  the  hardihood 
to  allege  that  this  error  is  any  where  supported,  or  ad- 
mitted hy  the  church  ;  on  the  contrary  he  must  know 
full  well,  that  it  was  one  of  the  principal  points,  oil 
which  the  reformers  laid  such  stress,  as  obnoxious  to 
divine  truth,  and  that  the  Episcopal  church  has  ever 
been  distinguished  for  the  strength  of  her  opposition  to 
this  very  error.  Did  he  feel  no  hesitation  in  endeavour- 
ing by  such  indirect  methods  to  fix  upon  the  church  the 
odium  of  retaining  a  long  exploded  superstition  ?  Will 
his  principles  permit  him  to  feel  no  uneasiness  under  the 
knowledge  that  these  unchristian  statements  might  reach, 
and  perhaps  satisfy  many  who  would  have  little  knowl- 
edge of  the   church  but  from  his  remarks  ;  and  wlio 

Litany,  (which  is  formed  on  the  basis  of  the  Episcopal)  although 
he  strikes  out  the  petition  to  the  Trinity,  yet  he  retains  the  others 
in  the  form  of  prayer  to  the  Father,  viz: — '■'■through  the  interces- 
sion of  thy  well-beloved  .So/i,  our  Redeemer,  have  mercy  upon  us,''''  ^c. 
'•  by  the  direction  and  assistance  of  thy  Holy  Spirit,  have  mercy  upon 
?«,"  »S-c.  Lindsey  had  previously  (in  1774)  adopted  the  prayer 
hook  of  the  English  church  altered  on  the  plan  of  Dr.  Clarke- 
The  petitions  of  the  Litany  resemble  those  in  Carpenter's — the 
second  petition  is,  "  O  God,  who  by  the  precious  blood  of  thy  only 
begotten  Son,  hast  purchased  to  thyself  an  holy  church,  and  placed  it 
under  thy  continual  protection,  have  mercy  upon  us.''''  The  third  is, 
"  O  God,  who  by  thy  Holy  Spirit,  dost  govern,  direct,  and  sanctify^ 
the  hearts  of  all  thy  faithful  servants,  have  mercy  upon  w.s."  This 
last,  if  we  are  not  mistaken,  is  the  Liturgy  used  at  King's  Chapel, 
,  Boston. 

15 


114 

would  probably  never  hear  of  any  denial  of  tlieir  truth, 
even  should  it  be  publickly  made  ? 

Will  our  readers  believe  that  the  extract  which  he 
llrst  quotes  is  from  a  prayer  in  which  tiv?  following 
passage  previously  occurs,  and  of  which  his  quotation  is 
but  the  same  sentiment  prolonged  ?  '*  Vouchafe  to  bless 
and  sanctify  with  thy  word  and  Holy  Spirit,  these  thy 
gifts  and  creatures  of  bread  and  wine,  that  we,  receiving 
them  according  to  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ's  holy  in- 
stitution, in  remembrance  of  Ids  death  and  passion,  may 
be  partakers  of  his  most  blessed  body  and  blood/'' 
The  other  extracts  which  he  has  adduced  stand  thus 
connected  in  the  Communion  office  :  '^  The  body  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Clu-ist  Avhich  was  given  for  thee,  preserve 
thy  body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life  :  take  and  eat 
this  in  REMEMBRANCE  that  Christ  died  for  thee  and  feed 
on  him  in  thj  heart  by  faith  with  thanksgiving.^^  '^  The 
blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  which  was  shed  for 
thee,  preserve  thy  body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life, 
drink  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ's  blood  ivasshed 
for  thee  and  he  thankful.''^    It  did  not  suit  the  Review- 

*  We  know  not  how  language  nmre  expressive  and  better 
adapted  could  be  used.  ''  This  perfectly  secures  us, — says  Arch- 
deacon Daubeny, — from  the  gross  corruptions  of  the  church  of 
Rome ;  because  the  commemoration  of  a  fact  cannot  be  the  fact 
itself;  the  representation  cannot  be  the  thing  designed  to  be  rep- 
resented ;  the  sign  cannot  be  the  reality  which  it  is  meant  to  signi- 
fy." Guide  to  the  Church. — jlppendix^  vol.  ii.  p.  414.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  Edward  VI.  may  have  written  in  the  style  which 
the  Reviewer  quotes,  though  we  should  like  some  better  authority 
for  it,  than  that  which  he  adduces  ;  and  we  should  Hke  also  to 
have  seen  how  the  same  Edward  ■would  have  xn'ritten  to  protestant 
dissenters,  had  they  been  known  to  him  :  we  might  then  perhaps 


115 

ei's  purpose  to  exliihit  them  in  this  connection,  nor  to 
refer  his  readers  to  the  article  of  tlie  church  on  tlie  suh- 
ject.  That  article  ( the  twenty-eighth)  has  these  words  : 
^f  The  hody  of  Christ  is  given,  taken,  and  eaten  in  the 
Supper, only  after  a  heavenlij, spiritual  manner.  And  the 
mean,  whcrehy  the  hody  of  Christ  is  received  and  eaten 
in  the  Supper  is  faith.''  "  The  real  presence  of  Christ's 
most  hlessed  hody  and  hlood,"  says  Hooker,  ^'  is  not 
to  he  sought  in  the  sacrament,  hut  in  the  worthy  re- 
ceiver.*' 

3.  We  are  ciiarged  witli  holding  that  haptism  is  a 
saving  ordinance, — that  is  to  say,  the  Liturgy  inculcates 
the  doctrine  of  haptismal  regeneration.  It  is  impossible 
IW  us  to  go  at  large  into  the  evidence  on  this  point ;  our 
limits  forbid  it.  and  we  can  only  givea  very  brief  explana- 
tion. ^'  When  the  churchman,'' — says  Bi;^hop  Hobart, 
in  his  third  charge  to  his  clergy, — ••'  in  the  language  of 
scripture,  of  primitive  antiquity,  and  of  the  articles  and 
liturgy  of  his  church,  calls  baptism,  regeneration,  he 
does  not  employ  the  term  in  its  popular  signification 
among  many  protestants  to  denote  the  divine  iniluences 
upon  the  soul  in  its  sanctification,  and  renovation ;  iu 
aholishing  the  hody  of  sin,  and  raising  up  the  graces 
and  virtues  of  the  new  man.  The  term  regeneration 
is  used  by  him  in  its  original  appropriate  and  technical 
acceptation,  to  denote  the  translation  of  the   baptised 

have  been  able  to  discover  how  much  to  allow  for  a  time-serving 
disposition.  While  we  are  on  the  subject  of  popery,  we  v.  ill  ven- 
ture to  ask  whether  sitting  at  the  communion  may  not  be  termed 
popish,  since  (according  to  \\heatley)  the  great  Pope  always  r€- 
ceives  in  that  posture  !  The  practice  is  not  derived  from  our 
iSaviour  ;  for  in  his  time  the  table  posture  was  not  sitting,  but,  re-= 
clining. 


116 

person  from  that  slate,  in  which,  as  destitute'of  any 
povenant  title  to  salvation,  he  is  styled  the  child  of 
wrath,  into  tliat  state,  which,  as  it  proflers  to  him  in  all 
cases,  the  covenanted  mercy  and  grace  of  God,  and  in 
the  exercise  of  repentance  and  faith  actually  conveys 
to  him  these  blessings,  is  styled  '^  a  state  of  salvation. ^^^ 
'^  Whatever  some  few  persons,  or  some  petty  sects," — 
says  Dr.  Barrow, — "  may  have  deemed,  it  hath  been 
the  doctrine  constantly,  and  with  very  general  consent, 
delivered  in  the  Catholic  church,  that  to  all  persons,  by 
the  holy  mystery  of  baptism  duly  initiated  to  Christian- 
ity, or  admitted  into  the  communion  of  Christ's  body, 
the  grace  of  God's  Holy  Spirit  certainly  is  bestowed, 
enabling  them  to  perform  the  conditions  then  under- 
taken by  them.''t     Hooker  calls  "  baptism  the  door  of 

*  See  John  iii.  3-5.  Titus  iii.  5.  "Whoever,"  says  Justin 
lyiartyr,  "  are  persuaded  and  beUeve  that  the  things  said  by  us 
are  true,  and  undertake  to  live  agreeably  to  them,  are  led  by  us  to 
a  place  where  there  is  water,  and  are  regeiierated  in  the  same  man- 
ner that  we  were  regenerated,  for  they  are  baptized  in  the  name 
of  God  the  Father  and  Lord  of  all,  of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, 
and  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  For  Christ  said  "  if  ye  are  not  regener- 
ated ye  cannot  enter  the  kingdom  of  Heaven."  Quoted  by  Bp. 
J\Jant. — Tracts  of  the  Eng.  Society  for  promoting  Christian  KnowledgCy 
vol.  vi.  "  He  came,"  says  Irenaeus,  speaking  of  Christ,  "  to  save  all 
persons  by  himself;  all,  I  say,  who  are  regenerated  by  him  unto 
God,  infants,  and  Uttle  ones,  and  children,  and  young  men,  and  old 
men."  Again  :  "  The  ordinary  way  of  being  freed  from  original 
gin^ — he  says, — is  baptism,  which  is  our  regeneration  unto  God." 
Quoted  in  Bp.  Bagofs  Serious  Caution  against  the  Anabaptists.  The 
truth  concerning  this  term  seems  to  be,  that  it  is  borrowed  from 
the  Jewish  practice.  See  WaWs  Hist.  Infant  Baptism.  Introduc- 
tion., section  vi. 

t  Sermon  xlv.  qwoted  in  Quarterly  Review  vol.  xv.  p.  491 — 
which  see,  and  also  Barrow  on  the  Creed,  London  ed.  1697.  p.  443:- 


117 

(dod'.s  house  ;"  in  making  use  of  it  for  the  admission  of 
men^thechurchrequiren  faith,  repentance  and  the  promise 
of  future  and  unreserved  obedience  astlie  conditions  upon 
which  she  receives  them.*  TJiat  principle  which  leads  us 
to  ascribe  every  thins;  in  us  which  is  good  to  God  leads  us 
also  to  ascribe  to  his  Holy  Spirit  every  tiling  which  iias 
a  tendency  to  draw  us  to  liiuiself.     We  neither  repent 
nor  believe  sincerely,  but  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.f     Where  these  requisites  are  apparent,  baptism 
is  rightly  administered,  and  the  promises  of  tlie  new 
covenant  being  in  that  baptism  sealed  to  him,  the  person 
baptised  may  justly  be  said  to  be  regenerated,  or  born 
anew.t     But  it  may  be  said,  that  many   persons   are 
baptised  and  of  course  declared  regenerate,  whose  pro- 
fession of  faith  and  repentance  is  utterly  insincere — a 
mere  mockery.     We    know  tiiis  may  be  the  case,   for 
the  scriptures   te&tify  that  Philip,  Peter  and  John  were 
successively  imposed  on  by  Binion  Magus, — and  where 
it  is  so,  we  can  only  say  with  those  apostles,  such  per- 
sons have  neither  imvt  nor  lot  in  this  matter.    Doubt- 
less they  are  in  the  same  situation  with  those  contem- 
plated in  the  twenty-ninth  article  ;  ^'  the  wicked  and 
such   as  be  void  of  a  lively  faith,   although  they  do 
carnally   and  visibly  press   with  their  teeth  the   sjjcra- 
ment  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  yet  in  no  wise 
are  they  partakers  of  Christ,  but  rather  to  their  c;)n- 
demnation  do  eat  and  drink  the  sign  or  sacrament  of 
so  great  a  thing."     Still  however,  as  it  is  impossible  for 
us  to  know  the  sincerity  of  the  applicaiii;^  and  as  it  is  an 

*  See  Romans  v.  12.    Eph.  ii.  3.     Acts  ii.  37-38 — and  viii.  3G. 

t  I.  Cor.  xii.  3.    Actsxi.  18. 

\  Johniii.  5.    Il.'Cor.i.  21.     (?ol.  ii.  12, 


118 

acl  in  wliicli  lie,  as  far  as  his  own  profession  &  go,  gives 
himself  up  to  GotFs  own  government,  we  must  leave  it  to 
him,  who  is  head  ovei*  the  church,  to  decide ;  and  con- 
scious that  we  have  done  our  part,  according  to  our 
best  conceptions  of  the  duty  he  has  assigned  us,  we 
may,  with  the  utmost  sincerity,  thauk "'  God  that  it  hath 
pleased  him  to  regenerate  his  servant ;''  for,  as  well  as 
we  can  judge  such  is  the  fact.  The  same  remark  ap- 
plies to  the  baptism  of  infants  ;  born  of  parents  who 
are  within  the  covenant,  they  are  baptised  on  the  faith  of 
their  parents,  who,  with  others,  are  sureties  to  the  church 
for  their  instruction  in  the  faith.  As  in  circumcision, 
what  they  are  incpable  of,  is  not  required  of  them.^^ 

4.  "  Bishops  are  able  to  communicate  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  confer  the  power  of  forgiving  sins.''  lu 
the  sense  in  which  the  Reviewer  wishes  to  be  under- 
stood we  can  with  great  safety  deny  the  charge,  and  as- 
sert that  the  church  assumes  no  such  power.  The  form 
4n  ordination  of  priests,  which  he  quotes,  and  Avhich  is 

*  See  Barrow  on  the  Creed  p.  442.  In  a  note  the  Reviewer  says, 
that  "  Dr.  Wyatt  calls  the  baptismal  font  the  laver  of  regeneration^ 
Is  he  ignorant  that  many  very  learned^  and  able  divines  have  done 
the  same  ?  For  instance  Cranmer,  Andrews,  Burnet,  Barrow  and 
others.  The  Reviewer,  when  he  quoted  the  27th  article  of  the 
church,  might  have  mentioned,  we  think,  for  the  information  of 
his  readers,  that  the  same  doctrine  is  to  be  found  substantial!}'  in 
the  standards  of  Protestants  generally  throughowt  Europe  ;  and 
that  the  very  language  of  the  article  is  infused  into  the  Cambridge 
and  Saybrook  platforms.  He  sneers  at  the  article,  indeed,  but  he 
does  not  inform  us  on  what  grounds  he  believes  its  doctrines  to  be 
false.  Mr.  Dodwell's  opinion,  if  such  as  the  Reviewer  quotes,  and 
we  have  no  reason  to  believe  it  is  not,  is  a  singular  one,  but  we  do 
not  see  what  tlie  church  has  to  do  with  it, 


119 

not  the  form  at  present  used,  is  taken  from  St.  John's 
account  of  the  manner  in  which  our  Saviour  commission- 
ed his  Apostles.  It  is  not  pretended  hy  any,  so  far  as 
we  arc  informed,  that,  Avhen  our  Saviour  uttered  these 
Avords,  and  hreatlied  on  the  Apostles,  any  more  was 
meant  by  him  than  to  convey  tlie  power  of  the  ministerial 
olficc.  It  is  certain,  that  this  event  occurred  some  time 
I)efore  the  miraculous  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the 
Apostles^  and  there  is  no  ground  on  which  to  assume 
that  they  were  before  that  descent  favoured  with  any 
portion  of  his  special  influences.  "  The  Holy  Ghost 
may  be  used,"  says  Hooker,*  ^'  to  signify  not  the  per- 
son alone,  but  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  we 
know  that  spiritual  gifts  are  not  only  abilities  to  do 
things  miraculous,  as  to  speak  with  tongues  which  were 
never  taught  us  ;  to  cure  diseases  without  art,  and  such 
like  ;  but  also,  that  the  very  authority  and  power  which 
is  given  unto  men  in  the  church  to  be  ministers  of  hohj 
tlings,  this  is  contained  among  the  number  of  those 
gifts  of  which  the  Holy  Ghost  is  author,  and  therefore 
he  which  gives  this  power,  may  say,  without  absurdity 
or  folly.  Receive  the  Jlohf  Ghost,  such  power  as  Christ 
hath  endued  his  Church  withal,  such  power  as  neither 
prince,  nor  potentate,  king,  nor  Csesar  on  earth  can 
give.  So  that  if  man  alone  had  devised  this  form  of 
speech  thereby  to  express  the  heavenly  wellsprins:  of 
that  power  which  Ecclesiastical  ordinations  doth  bestow, 
it  is  not  so  foolish  but  that  wise  men  might  bear  with  it." 
Upon  Unitarian  principles  we  should  suppose  the  ob- 
jection might  be  extended  higher,  for  on  the  presump- 
tion that  our  Saviour  was  a  faUihle  and  peccable  mav^ 

*  Ecclc-s.  Pol.  L.  V.  ?.  77. 


130 

this  language  would  seem  improper  to  fall  from  his  lips 
also.  Probably  our  opponents  have  a  solution  ready 
for  this  difficuliy.  We  know  of  none.  We  cannot 
here  bring  into  discussion  what  has  been  technically 
called  ^^  the  pow'er  of  the  keys  ;''*  and  can  only  say, 
that  it  is  obvious  our  Saviour  intended  by  tlie  words 
"  whose  soever  sins  yc  remit,  they  are  remitted  unto 
them,  and  whose  soever  sins  ye  retain  they  are  retain- 
ed"— to  convey  to  the  Apostles  the  power,  simply,  of 
exercising  discipline  in  the  churches  which  they  Avere 
to  establish.  They,  and  by  consequence  their  succes- 
sors, w  ere  to  admit  men  to  the  church,  to  administer  the 
laws  which  he  had  laid  down  for  its  government,  and 
to  exclude  notorious  offenders  from  its  privileges.  The 
power  to  perform  these  duties  resting  with  the  church,  it 
is  conveyed  in  ordination,  and  it  was  thought  best  to 
adopt  the  words  of  our  Saviour,  so  ftir,  at  least,  as  to 
allow  them  a  place  in  the  ordination  office,  as  expres- 
sive of  the  original  object  of  the  ministry.  No  power 
to  forgive  sins,  in  the  common  acceptation  of  the  term, 
is  claimed  by  our  church,  as  the  declaration  of  absolu- 
tion in  the  morning  and  evening  services  will  readily 
convince  any  one.f     The   form  actually   used   in  or- 

*  See  Barrow  on  the  Creed,  p.  278.  Bishop  White's  Lectures? 
on  the  Catechism,  p.  43. 

t"  Declaration  of  absolution,  or  remission  of  sins  to  be  pro- 
nounced by  the  Priest  alone.  Almighty  God,  the  Father  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  desireth  not  the  death  of  a  sinner,  but 
rather  that  he  may  turn  from  his  wickedness  and  live  ;  hath  given 
power  and  commandment  to  his  ministers,  to  declare  and  pro* 
novmce  to  his  people,  being  penitent,  the  absolution  and  remission 
of  their  sins,  He  pardoneth  and  absolveth  all  those,  who  truly 
repent  and  unfeignedly  behove  his  holy  gospel.     Wherefore,  let 


121 

Jaiuing  priests  is,  as  follows  ;  ^'  Take  thou  authority 
to  execute  the  office  of  a  priest  in  the  church  of  God 
now  committed  to  thee  by  the  imposition  of  our  hands, 
and  be  tliou  a  faithful  dispenser  of  the  word  of  God, 
and  his  holy  sacraments.  In  the  name  of  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  tiie  Holy  Ghost/'  If  then  it  were  admit- 
ted that  the  Bishops  claim  the  power  of  conveying  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  forgiving  sins,  in  their  common  accep- 
tation, yet  it  is  certain  they  do  not  attempt  to  exercise 
any  such  anthority. 

These  four  instances  oi  false  doctrine  the  Reviewer 
gives,  as  *•'  samples  of  the  service  book,"  and  we  sup- 
pose he  would  have  his  readers  infer,  that  they  are  but 
sanqdes  of  a  thoroughly  infected  mass.  He  has  indeed 
traversed  the  prayer  book  much  in  the  same  manner  as 
a  certain  deistical  writer  once  traversed  the  Bible  ;  and 
as  in  his  case  too,  the  hasty  conclusions  of  a  distemper- 
ed judgement  are  given  to  the  world  for  indubitable 
facts  ; — the  rash  constructions  of  a  heated  adversary 
are  exhibited  as  unquestionable  truths  ;  and  he  who 
would  be  imimrtial  is  required  to  believe  that  this  im- 
puted deformity  is  radical  in  the  very  nature  of  the  thing. 
We  know  not,  and  we  are  unwilling  to  believe,  that 
Unitarianism  has  any  advocates  within  the  church ;  and 
we  most  devoutly  wish  that  all  the  efforts  of  the  He- 
viewer  may  be  realised  in  keeping  from  her  ministry 

us  beseech  him,  to  grant  us  true  repentance  and  his  Holy  Spirit  ; 
that  those  things  may  please  him  which  we  do  at  this  present, 
and  that  the  rest  of  our  lite  hereafter  may  be  pure  and  holy ;  so 
that,  at  the  last,  we  may  come  to  his  eternal  joy,  through  JesH» 
Christ,  our  Lord." 

16 


122 

every  mau  infected  with  it.  We,  like  himself^  can 
have  no  sympathy  with  such 

— "  Sycophants  who  kneel, 
Christ's  nanxe  adoring',  and  then  preach  him  man." 

It  is  a  system  which  has  no  attractions  for  us  ;  we  see 
nothing  in  it  to  console  us  under  affliction^  or  to  smooth 
for  us  the  bed  of  death.  Knowing  our  native  helpless- 
ness we  feel  the  value  of  real  Christianity, — we  sec  our 
need  of  one  "  mighty  to  save.''  We  are  not  perhaps 
prepared  with  Bishop  Warburton  to  speak  of  Unitarian- 
ism  as  ^'  infidelity  in  disguise  ;"  nor  with  Mr.  Wilber- 
force  to  consider  it  "  a  sort  of  half-way  house  from 
nominal  orthodoxy  to  absolute  infidelity  ;"'  yet  it  seems 
to  us,  as  to  Mrs.  Earbauld,  to  be  at  least  '^  Christianity 
in  the  frigid  zone.'^* 

We  come  now  to  the  very  grave  objection  that  ^^  the 
book  of  Common  Prayer  contains  improprieties  of  lan- 
guage ;"  and  this  is  the  more  important  because  security 
from  this  objection  is  the  "  single  advantage^^  of  forms 
of  prayer !  This  charge  however,  is  not  produced  by  the 
Reviewer's  own  observation,  but  is  based  on  the  authority 
of  the  Protestant  Dissenter's  Catechism.  We  are  per- 
mitted to  understand  that  the  extract  refers  to  the  Ens:- 
lish  copy  of  the  prayer  book,  and  that  in  the  American 
some/ez£'  of  the  obnoxious  passages  are  corrected. 

AVith  the  Dissenter's  Catecliism  we  are  not  conver- 
sant, nor  indeed  do  we  much  desire  to  be.  We  hope 
we  mistake  its  object,  but  if  it  be,  like  that  of  the 
church,  '^  an  instruction  to  be  learned  by  every  person" 
before  they  be  admitted  to  "  a  participation  in  Christian 

*  See  R.  Adam's  ReUgious  world,  rol.  ii.  p.  176. 


123 

onHnances''  with  protestaut  dissenters,  it  cau  have  no 
very  powerful  tendency  to  produce  '^'agood  life  and  con- 
versation ;"  and  it  seems  to  us,  a  method  as  strange  as 
any  imaginable,  of  guarding  against  scandal.^ 

We  have  first  a  list  of  '^  uncouth  and  obsolete 
words  and  phrases."  Without  stopping  to  enquire 
upon  what  principle  a  word  is  to  be  termed  obsolete 
"while  it  is  found  in  a  standard  book,  of  very  extensive 
use,  and  admitted  as  authority  by  the  best  lexicograph- 
ers, we  remark  that  of  the  thirteen  instances  produced 
under  this  head,  hnifoxir  are  to  be  found  in  the  American, 
prayer  book,  and  on  referring  to  Johnson  we  find  that 
two  at  least  of  these  are  used  by  some  of  the  best  stand- 
ard writers  in  our  language.  It  is  probable  that  his 
quotations  from  the  Psalms  are  correct ;  some  of  them 
w^e  know  to  be  so.  We  do  not  however  think,  that 
any  of  these  expressions  are  so  uncouth,  as  to  cause  any 
difficulty  in  understanding  them,  though  some  of  them, 
might  probably  be  altered  to  advantage.  This  transla- 
tion of  the  Psalms  was  made  chiefly  from  the  Greek  of 
the  Septuagint,  and  from  this  cause  may  not  possess  in 

*  The  British  Critic,  in  a  Review  of  the  charge  of  Archdeacon 
Thomas  to  the  clergy  of  Bath,  1819,  referring  to  the  obnoxious 
manner  in  which  the  principles  of  dissent  are  inculcated  in  Eng- 
land, says,  "for  full  proof  of  this  offensive  mode  of  proceeding  on 
the  part  of  the  dissenters,  we  need  only  refer  to  their  Catechism  ; 
which,  instead  of  teaching  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Christiani- 
ty, as  might  be  expected  from  its  title,  is  wholly  designed  to  in- 
struct, and  establish  young  persons  in  the  principles  of  non-con- 
formity, by  a  regular  attack  upon  .the  frame  and  constitution,  the 
orders,  the  liturgy,  the  ceremonies,  the  articles,  and  the  disciphne 
of  our  church.-'  Trnly,  the  Reviewer  mast  have  an  ample  source 
to  draw  from". 


124 

all  respects  a  literal  conformity  to  the  Hebrew,  yet 
we  are  not  aware  of  the  existence  of  any  ^'^  gross  mis- 
translations." It  was  very  properly  retained  in  the 
American  prayer  book,  as  excellent  in  itself,  and 
familiarised  by  custom.  As  to  redundancies  in  the  ser- 
vice, the  Reviewer  should  liave  remembered  that  every 
repetition  does  not  deserve  to  be  thus  classed,  or  if  he 
thinks  otherwise,  still  we  shall  not  willin£;ly  concede 
our  opinion  to  him,  in  regard  to  some,  at  least,  of  tha 
instances  lie  adduces.  "'^  It  is  true  neither  in  philoso- 
phy nor  fact,"  says  a  writer,  "  that  devotion  abhors  re- 
petition." Of  the  three  instances  oiivant  of  connection 
which  he  produces, oize  only  is  to  be  found  in  the  Ameri- 
can prayer  book,  and  that  one  is  not  fairly  stated.* 
The  next  class  of  passages  to  which  he  objects,  he 
calls  absurd  or  unintelligihle.  The  stumbling  block 
in  this  case  appears  to  be,  not  so  much  in  the  language 
as  in  the  doctrines  of  the  incarnation,  and  of  the  Trinity, 
■which  it  conveys.  Has  it  ever  occurred  to  the  Review- 
er, or  his  party,  to  bring  this  same  objection  to  the  form 
of  words  directed  by  our  Savionr  to  be  used  in  baptism  ? 
Abundant  pains  have  been  taken  to  destroy  its  Trinita- 
rian sense.  But  if  in  this  sense  it  is  absurd  or  unintel- 
ligible, we  have  never  seen  a  Unitarian  explanation  of 

*  We  give  the  entire  Collect  referred  to.  "  A  Collect  for 
Peace,  [spiritual  and  temporal.]  O  God,  who  art  the  author  oi  peace 
and  lover  of  concord^  in  knowledge  of  whom  standeth  our  eternal 
life,  whose  service  is  perfect  freedom  ;  defend  us  thy  humble  ser- 
vants in  all  assaults  of  our  enemies,  that  we,  surely  trusting  in  thy 
defence,  may  not  fear  the  power  of  any  adversaries,  through  the 
might  of  Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord."  If  there  is  a  want  of  connec- 
tion here,  it  is  certainly  not  in  the  words  referred  to  by  the  Re- 
viewer. 


125 

it,  'VNTticli  was  not  infinitely  move  so.  The  slioricst  way, 
perhaps,  would  be  to  class  it  with  these  extracts  from 
Ihe  prayer  book,  and  thus  get  rid  of  all  of  them  at 
once.-^" 

^' From  this  specimen  of  faults  in  the  Liturgy"  tlie 
lleviewer  would  have  us  give  up  our  boast  of  its  excel- 
lence. Perhaps,  it  will  be  time  enough  to  do  so,  when 
ihe  learned  and  able  men,  tliose  of  tliem  at  least,  who 
are  living,  retract  their  opinions  as  already  given  by  us.  j- 
We  do  not  believe,  however,  nor  are  we  accjuainted 
with  any  who  do,  in  the  absolute  perfection  of  our 
liiturgy.  It  is  a  human  composition,  and  tlierefore  not 
free  from  the  faults  which  must  ever  attend  upon  the 
labours  of  men.  In  the  language  of  the  editors  of  the. 
Christian  Observer,  we  may  say  tliat  ''•Ave  would  not  be 
thought  in  our  struggle  for  the  honour  of  our  Liturgy 
to  be  the  champions  of  every  expression  contained  in 
it.  We  are  its  admirers,  not  its  idolators  ;  and  there- 
fore not  in  love  with  its  blemishes.  There  are  a  few 
parts,  which  would,  perhaps,  admit  of  the   knife ;  but 

*  "  In  one  of  the  prayers  in  the  communion  service,"  says  the 
Reviewer,  "  God  is  styled  Holy  Father.  But  the  rubric  orders 
that  on  Trinity  Sunday  this  title  shall  be  omitted  ;"  and  he  draws 
an  inference  from  this,  which  only  serves  to  expose  his  ignorance, 
for,  if  he  really  had  read  the  book,  he  would  have  seen  that  the 
same  page  explained  what  he  chooses  to  consider  as  done  without 
adequate  motive.  The  true  reason  why  this  term  is  to  be  omitted  on 
Trinity  Sunday  is,  because  it  verbullij  disagrees  with  the  language 
of  the  proper  preface,  for  the  day,  as  it  is  called ;  but  if  another 
preface,  also  provided  for  that  day,  is  used,  then  the  term  Holy 
Father  is  to  be  retained,  because  thei*e  is  then  no  disagreement  of 
that  nature. 

t  See  note  p.  83. 


126 

then  Ave  do  not  see  into  whose  h.iiul  ii  could  safely  bo 
trusted.  We  are  content,  however,  to  take  it  as  it  is, 
and  are  rather  disposed  to  wonder  it  is  so  good,  than  to 
complain  it  is  no  better.  Every  day's  experience  shews 
us,  it  is  perfectly  competent  under  tiie  divine  blessing 
to  produce,  and  what  is  perhaps  more,  to  revive  a 
spiritual  religion." 

As  the  Reviewer  admits  that  our  church  is  not  dis- 
tinguished, though  lie  would  liave  her  considered  dis- 
lionoured,  in  declaring  that  she  has  authority  in  matters 
of  faith ;  we  do  not  deem  ourselves  called  upon  to  de- 
feud  her  in  this  respect.  It  is  a  principle  to  be  found, 
we  believe,  more  or  less  plainly  expressed  in  the  for- 
mularies of  all  denominations  out  of  the  frigid  zone. 
And  even  tliere  it  is  virtually  assumed,  as  is  evident 
from  the  agreement  in  denoiincing  Trinitarianism,  Cal- 
vinism, &c.  Mr.  Sparks's  '^  strain  of  good  sense  and 
eloquence,"  quoted  by  the  Reviewer,  seems  to  us,  to  be 
destitute  at  the  least,  of  the  first,  if  not  of  botli,  these 
attributed  qualities.  Is  there  not,  for  instance,  some- 
thing superlatively  ridiculous  in  comparing  Theology 
to  Astronomy,  when  the  principles  of  the  former  Averc 
permanently  settled  by  its  author  eighteen  hundred 
years  ago  ;  Avhile  of  the  latter,  Ave  knoAV  nothing  except 
by  the  actual  discoAery  and  demonstration  of  principles, 
heretofore,  and  till  receiitly,  utterly  unknoAvn,  and  per- 
haps not  even  yet  fully  and  permanently  settled  ?  We 
should  have  thought  a  mind  regulated  by  good  sense 
and  a  sound  education,  would  have  scorned  to  employ 
such  a  burlesque  upon  reasoning.  But  admitting,  for  a 
moment,  that  there  is  any  thing  like  sufficiency  in  such 
arguments.  aaIjo  or  Avhere  is  the  Bacon,  or  the  Coperui- 


127 

CHS,  or  the  Newton,  who  is  to  stand  forth,  and  show  us 
ground  upon  which  we  may  set  our  feet,  and  from  which 
we  may  seetliat  we  dwell  not  in  an  immeasurable  void, 
or  in  a  pathless  chaos  ?     Sis  all  we  take  Mr.  Sparks,  or 
Mr.  Belsham,  or  the  Reviewer  ?  We  doubt,  not  a  little, 
w  hethcr  either  of  these  gentlemen  have  yet  found  a  sub- 
stantial base  for  their  own  feet,  notwithstanding  their 
anxiety  to  spring  a  mine  beneath  ours.*     Why    then 
should  we  look  to  either  of  them  for  support,  when  we 
have  only  their  assertion  that  our  present  footing  is  un- 
safe ?     We  are  of  opinion  Avith  Bishop  Pearson — ^'  that 
there  is  no  concerning  truth  in  Christianity  which  is  not 
old,   and  that  whatsoever  about  it  can  be  proved  to  be 
new,  is  for  that  reason  alone   decidedly  false.''     We 
hold  that  creeds  are  valuable,   not  as   standards   inde- 
pendent of  scripture,  but  as  summaries  collected  out  of 
it.     This  we  conceive  to  be  the  case  witli  the  formularies 
of  the  church,  and  with  this  belief  of  tlieir  orighi,  wA 
shall   not  be  prevailed  on  by  pompous  diction,  or  bold 
assertion,  to   abandon   them :    certainly  not  till  those 
who   would  dissuade  us  from  them,  know  themselves 
what  to  believe. t 

*  ''  Mr.  Belsham,  in  the  introduction  to  his  Letters  on  Arianism, 
&c.  remarks,  that  having  begun  to  think,  he  knows  not  where  to 
stop,  as  he  still  professes  to  seek  after  knowledge,  and  is  ver}' 
far  from  Hattering  himself  that  he  approaches  the  conlinc>7  of  dis- 
coverable truth."  R.  Adam's  Relig.  world,  vol.  ii.  p.  17  k  Dr. 
Priestley  and  others  have  remarked  to  the  same  purport. 

jMr.  Sparks's  remark  about  the  infallibility  of  the  church,  soemie 
to  us,  to  be  nearly,  if  not  equal!}',  as  applicable  to  individuals. 
We  are  told  in  the  scriptures  that  we  are  saved  by  faith  and  that//r 
that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned  ;  unless  every  individual  be  infalli- 
ble, then,  there  can  be  no  certaint'j  of  his  having  the  onlij  true  faith,  and 
he  may  even  spare  himself  the  trouble  of  claiming  (hf  right  U^ 
have  his  oi&n  particular  creed. 


128 

That  Milton  was  an  admirable  ^;oei  it  would  be  trea- 
son against  learning  and  literature  to  deny  ;  he  was 
nevertheless  but  a  miserable  divine,  and  a  most  un- 
charitable man.  We  ask  the  reader  to  peruse  the  fol- 
lowing invective  against  tlie  Bishops  of  the  English 
church,  in  connection  witii  the  Reviewer's  quotation  from 
liis  "  prose  works,"  concerning  creeds,  and  he  will  see 
some  grounds  for  tiiis  opinion  :  ^'  But  they,  that  by  the 
impairing  and  diminution  of  the  true  faith,  the  distresses 
and  servitude  of  tlieir  country,  aspire  to  high  dignity, 
rule  and  promotion  here,  after  a  shameful  end  in  this 
life,  (which  God  graxt  them  !)  shall  be  thrown  down 
eternally  into  the  darkest  and  deepest  gulph  of  hell ; 
where,  under  the  despiteful  control,  the  trample  and 
spurn  of  all  the  other  damned,  who  in  the  anguish  of 
their  torture,  shall  have  no  other  ease  than  to  exercise  a 
raving  and  bestial  tyranny  over  them  as  tlieir  slaves 
and  negroes,  they  shall  remain  in  that  plight  forever, 
the  basest,  the  lowermost,  the  most  dejected,  most  un- 
derfoot, and  down-trodden  vassals  of  perdition.*'*     Is 

*  Treatise  on  Reformation,  vol.  i.  p.  274.  Quoted  h}'  Jones  on 
the  church,  note  to  chap.  iii.  In  continuation  of  the  extracts 
made  by  the  Reviewer  from  Mr.  Sparks's  Letters,  we  find  the  fol- 
lowing parody,  as  we  call  it,  on  a  text  or  two  of  scripture.  "  St. 
Paul  enjoins  the  Galatians  to  '  stand  fast  in  the  liberty — wherewith 
Christ  had  made  them  free,  and  not  be  entangled  again  with  the 
yoke  of  bondage  ;'  and  to  the  Corinthians  he  writes, — '  We 
have  not  dominion  over  your  faith,  but  are  helpers  of  your  joy, 
for  by  faith  ye  stand.'  Not  by  faith  in  Creeds,  for  this  would  be 
giving  up  our  liberty,  taking  upon  us  a  yoke  of  bondage,  and  sub- 
mitting to  the  opinions  of  others  ;  but  by  faith  in  the  word  of  God, 
which  all  persons  are  free  to  consult, — and  this  freedom  all  must 
be  allowed  to  enjoy  before  they  can  be  required  to  believe  or 
obey."     Did  not  Mr.  ?.  very  well  know,  that  in  the  text  from  the 


129 

it  not  enough  to  make  the  blootl  run  cold  in  oar  veins 
to  read  such  denunciations  as  these  ?  Is  it  to  be  won- 
dered at,  if  men  of  such  temper  as  this  extract  displays, 
should  be  the  enemies,  not  of  creeds  alone,  but  of  every 
species  of  human  obligation  ?  With  what  feelings  then, 
must  we  be  inspired  when  we  see   such  a  writer  cited, 

epistle  to  the  Galatians,  St.  Paul  was  alluding  to  the  attempt  made 
among    that  people  by  Jndaizing    teachers  to  reduce  them  under 
the     dominion  of    the   Mosaic   law — "  to    put  a  yoke   upon    the 
necks  of  the  disciples,  which"  tho  Jews  themselves  had  not  been 
"  able  to  bear  ?"'     Suppose  zae  were  to  make  a  similar  accomoda- 
ting use  of  another  text  in  the  same  epistle,  and  say  to  our  readers, 
*■'  there  be  some  that  trouble  you  and  would  pervert   the  gospel 
of  Christ  ;  but  though  we,  or  an  angel  from  Heaven,   preach  any 
other    gospel    unto    you,   than   that     we   have     preached    unto 
you,    let   him    be    accursed."     We    suspect   Mr.    Sparks    would 
think    the   application  far  fetched    and    somewhat  unreasonable. 
With  regard  to  that  other  text,  tc?e  suppose  St.  Paul's  meaning  to 
be,  that  he  had  not  power  to  change  the  faith  which  he  had  preach- 
ed  to  them,  and  in  which  they  were   now  established,  and   that, 
though  he  was  coming  among  them  to  revive  neglected  discipline 
in  respect    to  their  practice,  yet  as  respected  their  faith,  he  was 
rather  disposed  to  rejoice  with  them,  for  in  that  they  had  remained 
stedfast.     Mr.  Belsham  asserts,  that  the  doctrines  of  necessity  and 
materialism  [though  admitted  according  to  Adam,  by  the  most  dis- 
tinguished   Unitarians,]   have  no  more  to  do  with  their  peculiar 
creed,  '•  than  they  have  with   the   mountains  in   the  moon."     As 
little,  we  conceive,  have   the  texts  quoted  by  Mr.  S.   to  do  with 
creeds  of  any  sort.     We  think  the  strain  of  Mr.  Sparks's  reasoning, 
generally,  as  here  quoted  by  the  Reviewer,  of  a  deistical  tendency  ; 
for  it  proceeds  upon  the  supposition,  that  the  fundamental  princi- 
ples of  Christianity  have  not  been  revealed  to  us,  but  are  to  be 
sought  out,  in  the  same  manner,  as  the  fundamental  principles  of 
Astronomy  have  bee»  discovered.     It  is  the  course  of  an  advocate 
lOT  the  religion  of  nature,  a  system  frigid  indeed. 

17 


130 

as  tlie  solemn  advocate  of  Christian  liberty  in  this  en- 
lightened age  ? 

The  E,evie^yer  asserts  that  the  earliest  reformers 
have  not  to  answer  for  this  obnoxious  clause.  There 
is  reason,  he  thinks,  to  believe  that  it  was  surreptitious- 
ly  inserted  after  their  time ;  antl  yet  however  this  sur- 
reptitious insertion  formed  no  objection  to  its  adoption 
on  the  restoration  of  the  church  in  1660  !  We  have 
not,  unfortunately,  either  Prettyman  or  Neal  at  hand  to 
consult,  but  we  have  read  the  Reviewer's  statement  with 
some  surprise.  Adam  says,  on  the  authority  of  Brougli- 
ton,  that  the  authenticated  original  of  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles  Was  destroyed  in  the  tire  of  London  ;  and  that 
the  copy  now  at  Cambridge  was  the  private  copy  of 
Archbishop  Parker  ;  which  is  allowed  however,  to  be 
the  most  authentic  extant.* 

We  have  at  length  arrived  at  the  arguments,  which 
are  to  prove,  beyond  all  contradiction,  that  the  articles 
of  the  church  are  Calvinistic.  We  consider  of  very  lit- 
tle importance  to  this  question,  what  may  have  been  the 
individual  opinions  of  the  Reformers.  We  believe  that 
it  was  their  intention  in  drawing  up  the  articles  not  to 
give  their  own  opinions,  in  which  we  may  reasonably 
suppose  there  might  not  have  been  perfect  conformity, 
but  to  make  such  a  statement  of  doctrines  as  could  be 
fairly  drawn  from  the  scriptures,  should  be  sufficiently 
explicit  against  the  church  of  Rome,   and  yet  should 

*  R.  Adam's  Religious  world,  vol.  ii.  p.  369. — Broughton's  Hist. 
Library,  vol.  i.  p.  84.  Selden  and  Heylinboth  assert  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  clause  to  which  the  Reviewer  objects.  It  was  in  the 
copy  of  articles  adopted  in  1552,  thoug^h  suri'eptitiously  erased  in. 
subsequent  editioni?. 


131 

leave  no  room  for  dissention  among  themselves,  on 
points,  at  least,  with  w  liich  they  were  tlien  conversant. 
This  is  the  opinion  of  many  of  the  ahlest  divines  both 
of  the  English  Church  and  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in 
America.*  The  question  is  simply,  are  the  articles  of 
tlie  church  Calvinistic  ?  It  is  very  easy  to  overtlirow 
the  whole  superstructure  of  what  the  lievieAver  is 
pleased  to  call  the  "  unanswerable  reasoning^^  of  Mr. 
Sparks  ;  nay,  wa  might  by  the  same  process  prove  the 
articles  to  be  Armini'an.  The  doctrines  of  the  depravity 
of  man  and  of  universal  redemp'aon  are  both  explicitly 
laid  down  in  the  articles  :  if  then  it  is  true  that  all  men 
are  born  into  the  world  depraved,  and  incapable  of  sal- 
vation ;  and  if  there  has  been  "  made  a  perfect  redemp- 
tion, propitiation,  and  satisfaction,  for  all  the  sins  of 
the  whole  world,  both  original  and  actual,"'  then  it  is 
a  natural  and  necessary  consequence,  that  all  persons 
are  made  capable  of  salvation  ;  they  have  been  perfectly 
redeemed,  entire  satisfaction  has  been  made  for  all  their 

*  The  framers  of  the  articles,  "  holy  men,  did  prudently  pre- 
discover,  that  differences  of  judgment  would  unavoidably  happen 
in  the  church,  and  were  loth  to  unchurch  any,  and  drive  them  off 
from  an  eueharistical  communion,  for  such  petty  differences  ;  which 
made  them  pen  the  articles  in  comprehensive  words  ;  to  take  in 
all,  who,  differing  in  branches,  meet  in  the  root,  of  the  same  reli- 
gion." Fuller''s  Hist.  ^.  12.  quoted  in  Bishop  White's  Comparative 
Views,  vol.  ii.  p.  23.  It  may  be  of  importance  to  remark  that 
Fuller  was  a  Calvinist.  To  the  same  effect,  say  the  editors  of  the 
Christian  Observer,  whose  sentiments  on  this  controversy,  are 
well  known.  "  Our  Reformers,  v.hatever  might  be  the  private 
opinions  of  some  of  them  on  disputed  points,  framed  the  articles 
with  a  view  to  include  all  pious  Christians,  without  exacting  a 
full  and  precise  conformity  to  their  own  particular  tenets." 
(christian  Observer,  vol.  xi.x..  p.  51,-»-.Vofe. 


132 

sins  ;  and  they  must  retain  this  condition.  If  it  is  said 
that  we  entirely  omit  to  notice  the  article  on  predestina- 
tion, we  reply,  in  the  same  manner,  does  Mr.  Sparks 
neglect  all  notice  of  the  article  on  universal  redemption  ; 
nay,  more,  he  draws  inferences  in  direct  contradiction  to 
its  express  terms.  Do  our  readers  need  any  thing  more  to 
show  the  absurdity  of  this  piece  of  unansiverable  rea- 
soning f  Did  they  ever  hear  of  a  man's  being  called 
upon  to  subscribe  to  doctrines  which  were  matter  of  in- 
ference ovAy'^  Suppose  we  were  to  infer  that  these  writers 
are  Mahometans,  because  they  agree  with  them  in  a 
point  or  tAvo  which  might  be  named,  would  they  think 
us  justified?* 

But  that  our  readers  may  have  an  opportunity  of  de- 
ciding for  themselves  on  this  point,  that  they  may  see 
how  cautious  is  the  language  of  the  Church,  and  with 

*  Mr.  Spax'ks's /)remw«,  as  founded  on  the  articles,  are  false 
The  doctrine  of  depravity  is  not  laid  down  either  in  the  articles 
or  homilies  in  stronger  terms  than  in  the  third  point  of  Arminian- 
ism  ;  and  the  article  on  predestination  no  where  speaks  of  "  a 
CERTAIN  number''''  of  the  elect.  The  language  of  the  article  is  ex- 
tremely guarded  in  this  respect.  See  Bishop  White's  Comparative 
Views,  vol.  ii.  p.  30.  The  paucity  of  the  extracts  of  the  Re- 
viewer from  the  Homilies,  to  support  his  construction  of  the  17th 
article  would  be,  in  such  a  work,  we  think,  conclusive  evidence 
against  the  opinion  that  the  Reformers  intended  to  express  that 
doctrine  distinctly.  We  conceive,  however,  that  even  they  have 
no  reference  to  the  doctrine,  and  as  a  plain  proof  of  it,  we  give 
the  following  from  the  sa7ne  Homily. — "  Our  Saviour  Christ  testi- 
fieth  of  poor  men,  that  they  are  dear  unto  him,  and  that  he  loveth 
them  especially  ;  for  he  calleth  them  his  little  ones,  by  a  name  of 
tender  love  :  he  saith  they  be  his  brethren.  And  St.  James 
saith,  that  God  hath  chosen  them  to  be  the  heirs  of  his  kingdom." 
Will  it  be  pretended,  therefore,  that  all  the  subjects  of  alms  giving 
wore  God's  chosen  ones' 


133 


what  an  evea  hand  she  holds  the  balance  between  the 
rival  systems  of  Calvinism  and  Arminianism,  we  will 
set  before  them  side  by  side,  the  Articles  of  the  Church 
which  are  referred  to,  and  tiie  "  five  points"'  c,t'  the 
other  systems,  taken  from  R.  Adam's  Ueligious  World 
Displayed. 


Calvi 


has 


1.  God 
chosen  a  cer- 
tain number  in 
Christ  to  eter- 
nal glory  be- 
fore the  foun- 
dation of  the 
world,  accord- 
ing to  his  im- 
mutable pur- 
pose, and  of 
his  free  grace 
and  love,  with- 
out the  least 
foresight  of 
faith,  good 
works,  or  any 
condition  per- 
formed by  the 
creatures  ;  and 
that  the  rest  of 
mankind  he 
was  pleased  to 
pass  by,  and  or- 
dain them  to 
dishonour  and 
wrath  for  their 
sins,  to  the 
praise  ©f  his 
vindictive  jus- 
tice. 


Articles  of  the  Church.  Jlrminianism. 

17tb. — Predestination  unto  life  1.  God  from 
is  the  everlasting  purpose  of  God.  all  eternity, 
whereby  (betore  the  foundations  determined  to 
of  the  earth  were  laid)  he  hath  bestow  salva- 
coastantiy  decreed  by  his  coun-  tion  07i  those 
scl,  secret  to  us,  to  deliver  from  whom  he  /ore- 
curse  and  damnation,  t/iose  saw  '^rndd  per- 
whoni  he  hath  chosen  in  Christ  out  severe  unto  the 
of  mankind,  and  to  bring  them  end  in  their 
by  Christ  to  everlasting  salvation  faith  in  Christ 
as  vessels  made  to  honour.  Jesus ;  and  to 
Wherefore  they  which  be  endued  intiict  ever- 
with  so  excellent  a  benefit  of  lasting  punish- 
God,  be  called  according  lo  God's  ments  on  those 
purpose  by  his  spirit  working  in  who  should 
due  season  :  they  through  grace  continue  in  un- 
obey  the  calling:  they  be  justi-  belief,  and  re- 
tied  freely  :  they  be  made  the  sist  to  the  end 
sons  of  God  by  adoption:  they  his  divine  assign 
walk  religiously  in  good  works,  tance  :  so  that 
and  at  length  by  God's  grace,  election  was 
they  attain  to  everlasting  felicity,  conditional^and 

As  the  godly   consideration  of  reprobation  in 

Predestination,  and   our  election  like      manner, 

in  Christ  is  full  of  sweet,  pleasant  the    result     of 

and  unspeakable  comfort  to  god-  foreseen     inti- 

ly   persons,   and  such   as  feel  in  delity  and  per- 

themselves  the  workings  of  the  severing  wick-, 

spirit  of  Christ,  mortifying  the  nes.s. 
works  of  the  flesh,  and  their 
earthly  members,  and  drawing  up 
tiieir  minds  to  high  and  heavenly 
tilings,  as  well  because  it  doth 
greatly  establi:-;h,  and  confirm 
their  faitL  cf  eternal  salvation  to 
be  enjoyed  through  Christ,  as 
because  it  doth,  forventiv  kindle 


134 


Calvinism.  Articles  of  the  Church. 

their  love  towards  God  :  so  for 
curious  and  carnal  persons,  lack- 
ing the  spirit  of  Christ,  to  have 
continually  before  their  eyes  the 
sentence  of  God's  predestination, 
is  a  most  dangerous  downfall, 
whereby  the  devil  doth  thrust 
them  either  into  desperation,  or 
into  wretchlessness  of  most  un- 
clean living,  no  less  perilous  thaa 
desperation. 

Furthermore,  we  must  receive 
God's  promises  in  such  wise  as 
they  be  generally  set  forth  to  us 
in  holy  scripture :  and  in  our 
doings  that  will  of  God  is  to  be 
followed,  which  we  have  ex- 
pressly declared  unto  us  in  the 
word  of  God. 

2.  JesusChrist  Art.  31.  The  offering  of  Christ 

ty   his   suffer-  once    made,   is   that  perfect    re- 

ings  and  death,  demplion,   propitiation  and  satis- 

made  an  atone-  faction  for  all  the  sins  of  the  whole 

ment   only  for  worlds   both  original  and  actual, 

the  sins  of  the  and  there  is  none  other  satisfac- 

dect.  tion  for  sin,  but  that  alone.* 


Arminianism. 


2.  JesusChrist 
by  his  suffer- 
ings and  death, 
made  an  atone- 
ment for  the 
sins  of  all  man- 
kind and  of 
every  individual 
in  particular  ; 
none,  howev- 
er, but  those 
who  believe  in 
him,  can  be 
partakers  of 
their  divine 
benefit. 


*  "  When  the  question  concerning  the  extent  of  the  design  of 
the  death  of  Christ,"  says  Bishop  White  on  the  authority  of 
Brandt, — "  came  on  in  the  synod  of  Dort,  in  the  74th  session  ; 
two  of  the  English  deputies  Ward  and  Davenant  maintained  that 
it  was  for  all  mankind,  while  the  Bp.  of  Landaff  and  Goad  aflirmed 
it  to  be  partial,  and  when  the  31st  article  of  their  church  was  brought 
into  view  the  Bishop  interpreted  it  as  being  intended/or  all  sorts 
of  men.  Balquanquall,  the  representative  of  the  Scotch  church, 
spoke   at   large    for  the  partiality  of  redemption."     The   good 


135 


Cahinisiii.  ^Irticles  of  the  Church. 

3.  Mankind  Art.  9.  Original  sin  standeth 
are  totdlly  de-  not  iti  the  following  of  Adam  (as 
praved  in  con-  the  Pelagians  do  vainly  talk)  :  but 
sequence  of  it  is  the  fault  and  corruption  of 
the  fall ;  and  the  nature  of  every  man  that 
by  virtue  of  naturally  is  engendered  of  the 
Adam's  being  offspring  of  Adam,  whereby  man 
their  public  is  very  far  gone  from  original 
head,  the  guilt  righteousness  and  is  of  his  own  na- 
of  his  sin  was  ture  inclined  to  evil.,  so  that  the 
imputed  and  a  flesh  lusteth  always  contrary  to 
corrupt  nature  the  spirit ;  and  therefore  in  every 
conveyed  to  person  born  into  the  world  it 
all  his  posteri-  deserveth  God's  wrath  and  dam- 
ty,  from  which  nation.  And  this  infection  of  na- 
proceed  all  ture  doth  remain,  yea,  in  them 
actual  trans-  that  are  regenerated  ;  whereby 
gression,  and  the  lust  of  the  flesh,  called  in 
by  sin  we  are  Greek  (p^ovtjftet  c-ct^xoi  which  some, 
made  subject  do  expound  the  wisdom,  some, 
to  death  and  sensuality,  some,  affection,  some, 
all  miseries,  the  desire  of  the  flesh,  is  not  sub- 
temporal, spir-  jecito  the  law  of  God.  And  al- 
itual  aad  cter-  though  there  is  no  condemnation 
nal.  for  them  that  believe  and  are 
baptised  :  yet  the  apostle  doth 
confess  that  concupiscence  and 
lust  hath  of  itself,  the  nature  of 
sin. 


4.  All  whom  10th.    The  condition  of  man 

God   has   pre-  after   the    fall   of  Adam   is  such 

destinated     to  that  he  cannot   turn  and  prepare 

life,       he      is  himself    by     his    own      natural 

pleased,  in  his  strength,    and    good    works,    to 

appointed  time,  faith,    and    calling    upon  God  : 

effectually      to  wherefore  wt-  have  no  power  to 

cM     by      his  do  good  works   pleasant  and  ac- 


Arminianisnb, 

3.  True  faith 
cannot  pro- 
ceed from  the 
exercise  of 
our  natural 
faculties  and 
powers,  nor 
from  the  force 
and  operatioa 
of  freewill  ; 
since  man  in 
consequence  of 
his  natural  cor- 
ruption^ is  in- 
capable either 
of  thinking  or 
doing  any  good 
thing  :  and 
therefore  it  is 
necessary  to 
his  conver- 
sion that  he  be 
regenerated, 
and  renewed 
by  the  opera- 
ation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost, 
which  is  the 
gift  of  God 
through  Jesus 
Christ. 

4.  Divine 
grace  or  the 
energy  of  the 
Holy  Ghost, 
begins  and 
perfects  every 
thing  that  can 
be  called  good 


Bishop,  it  seems,  was  obliged  to  travel  out  of  the  hteral  and 
grammatical  sense  of  the  article,  in  order  to  accommodate  it  ttj 
Calvinism,  while  the  Scotch  deputy,  having  the  explicit  language 
of  his  church  to  favour  him,  needed  no  such  tiBesse.  See  White"? 
Gumparative  Views,  vol  ii.  p.  iO. 


136 


Calvinutn. 

word  and 

spirit,  out  of 
that  stale  of 
sin  and  death, 
in  which  they 
are  hy  nature, 
to  grace  and 
salvation  bj' 
Jesas  Christ. 


Articles  of  the   Church. 

ceptable  to  God,  without  the 
grace  of  God  by  Christ  preven- 
ting us.  that  we  may  have  a  good 
will,  and  working  with  us  when 
we  have  that  good  will. 


5.      Those         16th.     Not  every  deadly   sin, 

whom  God  has     willingly    committed   alter    bap- 

eft'ectually  cal-    tism,  is  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost 

led  and  sancti-     and  unpardonable.       Wherefore 

lied      by     his     the  grant  of  repentance  is  not  to 

spirit,  shall  not     be  denied  to  such  as  fall  into  sin 

finally         fall     after  baptism.     After  we  have  re- 

froin  a  stale  of    ceived  the  Holy  Ghost  we  may  dc- 

grace.  part  from  grace    given^   and  fall 

into  sin  ;  and  by  the  grace  of  God 

(we  may)  arise  again  and  amend 

our  lives.     And  therefore   they 

are   to  be    condemned   who    say 

that  they  can    no  more    sin    so 

long  as  they  live  here,  or  deny 

the  place  of  forgiveness  to  such 

as  truly  repent. 

[  The  Puritans^  at  the  Hampton 
Court  Conference  in  1604,  re- 
quired that  the  words — yet  neither 
totally  nor  finally — shoidd  be  in- 
serted after.) — may  fall  into  sin. 
This,  however.,  which  would  have 
made  this  article  Cahinistic^  wms 
refused  them. 


Anainianism. 

in  man,  and, 
consequently, 
all  good  works 
are  to  be 
attributed  to 
God  alone  ; 
nevertheless, 
this  grace  is  of- 
fered to  all,  and 
does  not  force 
men  to  act 
against  their 
mclinations,67<i 
may  be  resisted^ 
and  rendered 
ineffectual  by 
the  perverse 
will  of  the  im- 
j>enitent  sin- 
ner. 

5.  God  gives 
to  the  truly 
faithful  who 
are  regenera- 
ted by  hi? 
grace,  the 
means  of  pre- 
serving them- 
selves in  this 
state  ;  the  re- 
generate may 
lose  true  justi" 
fying  faith,  fall 
from  a  state  of 
grace,  and  die 
in  their  sins. 


137 

It  will  be  seen  by  the  reader  that  the  two  doctrines 
of  tiie  depravity  of  human  nature,  and  predestination 
unto  life,  are  not  peculiar  to  cither  creed,  but  are  held 
])y  all  thou^^h  differently  expressed  in  each.  The  doc- 
trines of  irresistible  grace,  of  the  perseverance  of  the 
saints,  and  of  particular  redemption,  are  found  only  in 
the  Calvinistic  system,  and  are  more  or  less  distinctly 
opposed  in  the  others.  We  shall  now  allege  some 
facts  to  show,  that  the  Articles  of  the  Church  have  never 
been  considered  by  those  best  qualified  to  judge,  to  be 
clearly  Calvinistic. 

That  the  articles  have  not  been  considered  as  possess- 
ing this  character  is  shown  : 

1.  By  the  dispute  at  Oxford  in  1595,  which  seems 
to  have  been  on  a  point  similar  to  that  now  before  us, 
to  settle  which  on  tlie  principles  of  Calvinism,  Arch- 
bishop Whitgift  drew  up  and  sent  as  "  the  undoubted 
sense  of  the  Church  of  England,''  the  famous  Lambeth 
Articles^  some  of  which,  in  our  opinion,  are  ratlier  in- 
consistent with  the  articles  of  the  church.  Besides,  to 
use  the  language  of  Bishop  White,  ^' what  occasion  was 
there  for  them  if  their  sense  liad  already  been  declared 
in  the  Tliirty^-nine  ?'** 

2.  By  the  fact  that  they  were  adopted  by  the  Church 
of  Ireland  in  1634,  tlirongh  the  influence  of  Archbishop 
Laud  whose  principles  are  acknowledged  on  all  hands 
to  have  been  anti-calvinislic.\ 

*  Comparative  View?,  vol.  ii.  p.  174. — ct  seq. 

t  A  set    of  articles   drawn   up  by    Archbishop  Usher  had  pre- 
viously beeft  adopted  by  the   Irish  church,  but  Archbishop  Laud 
succeeded  in  having-  them  rejected,  and  the  Thirtj'-nine  introduced. 
K  Adum'.-i  Rclis^ious  World,  vol.  ii.  p.  369. 
18 


138 

3.  By  tlie  fact  tliat  the  Westminister  Assembly  of 
( Calviiiistic)  Divines,  ^vhicll  sat  in  1643,  rejected  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles  ;  and  drew  up  a  new  system,  in 
Avhicli  great  precision  was  used  on  the  points  peculiar 
to  Calvinism. 

4.  By  the  declaration  of  King  Charles  I.  annexed  to 
the  Englisli  articles,  that  "  in  those  curious  points,  in 
which  the  present  differences  of  men  lie,  m6n  of  all  sorts 
take  the  articles  to  be  for  tliem."* 

5.  By  the  "  Dissenters  reasons  for  separating  from 
the  Church  of  England,"  drawn  up  by  Dr.  Gill,  an 
eminent  Calvinistic  Baptist.  In  the  fourth  reason,  re- 
ferring to  the  articles,  it  is  said,  they  '^  are  very  defec- 
tive in  many  things  :  there  are  no  articles  relating  to 
the  two  covenants  of  grace  and  works  ;  to  creation  and 
providence  ;  to  the  fall  of  man  ;  the  nature  of  sin,  and 
the  punishments  for  it ;  to  atlojjtion,  effectual  vocation  : 
sanctification,  faith,  repentance  and  the  final  persever- 
ance of  the  saints  ;  nor  to  the  law  of  God  ;  Christian 
liberty  ;  church  government  and  discipline;  the  conj- 
munion  of  the  saints,  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and 
the  last  judgement." 

6.  In  the  Liturgy  ^^^'o/^osef^  to  be  adopted  by  the  Gen- 
era!   Convention  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 

*  "  Though  some  dilTerences  have  been  ill  raised,  yet  we  take 
comfort  in  this,  that  all  clergjmen  within  our  realm  have  always, 
most  wiUingly  subscribed  to  the  articles  established  :  which  is  an 
argument  to  us  that  they  all  agree  in  the  true,  usual,  and  literal, 
meaning  of  the  said  articles,  and  that  even  in  those  curious  points, 
in  which  the  present  differences  of  men  lie,  men  of  all  sorts  take 
the  articles  to  be  for  them."  This  is  a  very  distinct  reference  lo 
the  Calvinistic  and  Armmian  controvei'sy.  See  also  Bishop 
White's  Comparative  Views,  vol.  ii.  p.  182. 


139 

held  in  Pliiladclpliia  in  1785,  the  articles  were  reduced, 
in  number  to  ticenty,  and  were  somewhat  altered,  cer- 
trJuly  without  any  additional  bias  to  Calvinism,  and  yet 
in  the  preface,  Avhere  an  account  of  the  alterations  is 
given,  it  is  said,  "  the  articles  of  religion  have  been  re- 
duced in  number,  yet  it  is  humbly  conceived  that  the 
doctrines  of  the  Church  of  England,  are  preserved  en- 
tire ;  as  beingjiidged  jierfectly  agreeable  to  the  gospel.^'' 

7.  It  has  l)cen  publickly  asserted,  and  never  yet  de- 
nied, that  in  the  General  Convention,  which,  in  1801 
unanimously  adopted  the  Articles  as  they  UQW  stand^ 
there  was  not  a  single  person,  who  either  lield  the  pe- 
culiar doctrines  of  Calvin,  or  who  understood  the  Ar- 
ticles as  supporting  tliem.^- 

8.  The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  Scotland,  on 
being  admitted  to  tlic  benefits  of  toleration,  was  re([uire(l 
to  adopt  the  Thirty-nine  xVrticles.  Tlie  clergy  accord- 
ingly subscribed  them  in  a  general  Convocation  at 
Lawrencekirk  in  1804  ;  and  they  subscribed  them,  "'•  1 
believe,'-  says  Adam,  "  to  a  mayi  in  the  anti-calvinistic 
sense.-\ 

9.  The  Reviewer  concedes  that  ^^  a  great  majority 
of  the  clergy  of  the  English  church  both  in  Europe 
and  America  is  understood  to  entertain  sentiments  the 
opposite  of  those  of  Calvin,'^  and  "yet  to  these  articles  in 
euteiing  on  their  oj0Bre  tliey  give  in  the  most  solemn  man- 
ner their  assent."  And  the  editors  of  the  Edinburgh  En- 

*  Six  only  of  the  members  of  the  Convention,  which  in  1703  set 
forth  the  '•  proposed  book,"  were  members  of  that  in  1801.  Tuvq. 
states  not  represented  in  the  fornior,  were  in  the  latter;  and  two 
states  represented  in  the  former  were  not  in  the  last.  Consider- 
able opportunity  was  thus  afforded  for  diversity  of  opinion, 

,t  R.  Adam's  Rehgious  world,  vol.  ii.  p.  425. 


140 

cyclopedia  admit,  tliat  ^^some  of  the  most  learned  and 
conscientious  of  her  divines  have  doubted  whether  the 
articles  are  Calviriistic  or  Lutheran."  Adam  asserts 
on  the  authority  of  Burnet,  Waterland  and  others,  that 
some  of  the  Reformers  were  inclined  to  the  f 'alvinistic, 
and  others  to  the  Arminian  scheme.  It  is,  however,  an  un- 
doubted fact,  that  many  persons,  subsequently  to  the  re- 
turn of  the  exiles  from  Holland  and  Geneva  to  England 
in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  have  construed  the  articles  in 
a  Calvinistic  sense  as  far  as  they  go,  and  have  defended 
them  as  such,  but  it  is  equally  unquestionable,  tliatsuch 
persons  have  ever  considered  them  defective  as  a 
scheme  of  Calvinistic  doctrine.* 

Upon  what  grounds,  then,  consistent  with  that  cliarity 
which  Iwpetli  all  things,  or  even  with  manly  feeling, 
could  the  RevieAver  represent  the  conduct  of  so  large  a 
body  of  learned  and  enlightened  n^en  as  are  included 
in  the  English,  Irish,  Scotch  and  American  Protestant 
Episcopal  Churches,  entertaining  sentiments  different 
from  Calvin,  as  giving  ichen  entering  on  their  office, 
their  assent  in  the  most  solemn  manner  to  calvinistic 
articles  f  Does  he  suppose  tliat  the  person  subscribing 
is  bound  by  the  construction ,  for  it  is  notliing  more,  of 
Mr.  Sparks,  of  the  Reviewer,  or  indeed  of  any  other 
person  than  himself?  Can  he  be  considered  as  sub- 
scribing, to  ma^^ers  of  iw/erewc?^  in  opposition,  both  to 
the  majority  of  those  who  have  gone  before  him,  and  to 
the  express  terms  of  the  articles  themselves  ?  How 
preposterous  ! 

'llie  Reviewer  asserts  that  with  regard  to  subscription, 
tlie  English  Clergyman  is  more  leniently   dealt  with 

*  Review,  p.  51. — Edin.  Ency.  vol.  viii.  p.  625,  Philadelphia 
rdiuou.     R.  Adam's  Relig-ious  world,  vol.  ii.  p.  371. 


141 

than  tlie  Araeiican  ;  for  he  is  required  only  to  engai;e 
for  the  present,  and  to  ^^  acknowledge  all  and  every 
of  the  articles  to  be  agreeable  to  the  word  of  God," 
while  ^'  tiie  American  must  take  on  him  obligations  for 
the  future.'*'*  He  proba])ly  did  not  know  that  in  Eng- 
land and  Ireland  before  any  clergyman  can  be  admitted 
to  a  benefice,  or,  as  a  lecturer,  he  must  make  a  similar 
declaration  of  conformity  ; — aud  that  in  Ireland  sub- 
scription to  all,  or  any  of  the  articles  is  not  necessary 
either  at  ordination,  or  institution.!  As  to  his  remarks, 
that  the  clergy  of  the  Episcopal  church  are  required 
formally  to  renounce  the  advantage  of  future  enquiry, 
^ve  need  only  say  tliat  the  doctrine  of  the  church  is  cx- 

*  Bisliop  White  it  seenis  thinks  differently,  and  as  the  sentiments 
of  this  amiable  and  learned  prelate  ought  to  have  weight,  botli 
from  his  character  and  the  part  he  has  taken  in  the  whole  of  Hie 
general  transactions  of  the  church,  we  give  it  here.  '^  There  is 
one  particular  in  \vhich  there  is  less  provision  for  uniformity  of 
sentiment  in  this  church,  than  in  the  church  of  England,  It  is  in 
the  form  of  subscription  :  that  of  the/on/tej-  church,  being  in  vyords 
not  admitting  of  the  construction  that  the  articles  require  consent 
in  every  minute  particular.  Unless  a  candidate  for  the  ministry 
be  fully  satisfied  with  them  as  a  bod}'  of  Christian  doctrine  ;  he 
prevaricates  if  he  assents  to  them.  But  this  does  not  pledge  him 
to  the  extent  here  affirmed  to  he  avoided.''''  Comparative  Views,  vol. 
ii.  p.  191.  The  only  subscription,  or  declaration,  required  of  a 
candidate  for  orders  in  the  American  Episcopal  Church  is  the  fol- 
lowing. "  I  do  believe  the  Holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  Xew 
Testaments  to  be  the  word  of  God,  and  to  contain  all  things  ne- 
cessary to  salvation.  And  I  do  solemnly  engage  to  conform  to  the 
doctrines  and  disiipiiue  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in 
these  United  States." 

t  See  Christian  Observer.  \ol.  xviii.  p. ')i5.  Browne's  Eccle- 
siastical Lciw,  vol.  ii.  p.  'M!.  t]i;ot"(i  in  K.  Adant*;  IltiiJgious  Worlil, 
vol.  ii.  p.  37* >. 


142 

plicit  only  on  points  considered  fundamental,  and  gen- 
erally received  as  sucli,  while  considerable  latitude  is 
allowed  for  the  indulgence  of  private  opinion  and  re- 
search. The  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  gospel  are 
not  to  be  sought  for,  at  this  late  period  ;  they  have  long 
been  established  and  known.  Conformity  may  with 
great  propriety  be  required  to  thcin,  and  he  who  is  not 
prepared  for  this,  is  not  fitted  to  enter  the  ministry  of  a 
church  which  rests  upon  them.* 

The  Reviewer  next  travels  out  of  the  points  in  con- 
troversy to  give  us  a  review  of  Paley's  chapter  on  sub- 
scription. Thither  we  shall  not  follow  him.  We  can, 
by  no  means,  assent  to  Paley's  doctrine  ;  on  the  con- 
trary, we  think  it  highly  dangerous,  and  should  regret  to 
see  it  defended. 

We  arc  next  favoured  with  a  neat  speculation  on  the 
use  of  creeds  ; — those  nuisances  of    creeds, — as   he, 

*  We  are  fully  aware  of  all  that  may  be  said  about  the  hindling 
of  a  glorious  blaze  of  light  in  our  day,  and  around  us.  Its  lustre 
already  has  dazzled  and  sometimes  confused  us  a  little.  We  have 
looked  with  some  patience  to  a  few  critics,  who  have  promised  us 
to  lighten  our  darkness  with  large  poi-tions  of  this  illumination, 
but  we  have  found  the  rays  to  partake  very  much  of  the  random 
and  eccentric  character  of  the  northern  lights^  or  more  classically', 
the  Aurora  BoreaUs.  We  have  endeavoured  in  vain  to  fix  our 
eyes  steadily  upon  them.  One  linds  copious  faults  in  the  good  old 
translation  of  the  Scriptures,  and  obligingly  asks  us  to  submit  to  his 
rendering  of  the  places  to  which  in  particular  he  objects  ;  this,  per- 
haps, is  literal,  or  nearly  so.  We  look  at  it,  and  discover  that  it 
•needs  another  translation  to  make  it  intelligible.  This  difficulty 
ho  obviates,  by  politel}''  giving  us  his  owii  exposition^  or  opinion^ 
which,  perhaps,  it  would  be  a  sin  to  call  a  cj-ecd.  Another  how- 
ever is  more  liberal,  and  suppUes  us  with  half  a  dozen  different 
rendering?,  telling  u.«  with  all  the  rourteousness  of  a  s^iop-keeper 


143 

scavens;er  like,  is  plensed  to  term  them.  We  are  sure 
that  men  of  good  sense  will  smile  at  the  self-compla- 

"  take  which  you  please,  gentlemen."  Give  up  the  received 
translation  on  the  points  obnoxious  to  these  enlightened  men,  and 
all  is  well. 

''  Hence  comment  after  comment,  spun  as  tine 
As  bloated  spiders  draw  the  tlimsy  line  : 
Hence  the  same  word,  that  bids  our  lusts  obey, 
Is  misapplied  to  sanctify  their  sway — 
If  stubborn  Greek  refuse  to  be  his  friend, 
Hebrew,  or  Syriac,  shall  be  forced  to  bend  : 
If  languages  and  copies  all  cry,  no — 
Somebody  proved  it  centuries  ago. 
Like  trout  pursued,  the  critic,  in  despair, 
Darts  to  the  mud.  and  linds  his  safety  there." 

Co'x.'pcr's  Progress  of  Erraf. 

The  translators  of  the  Bible  who  were  commissioned  for  that 
purpose  by  King  James,  formed  together  a  mass  of  learning  and 
ability,  such  perhaps,asit  might  be  diflioult  to  collect  even  in  our  day. 
"  These  learned  men,"  says  Dr.  Gray,  "iniact  took  in  the  whole 
scope  of  scripture,  and  collated  its  diil'erent  parte,  so  as  not  to  judge 
of  expressions  trom  a  solitary  view,  but  from  a  full  and  accurate 
examination."  We  do  not  undertake  to  say  this  translation  is 
thoroughly  perfect,  but  then  when  we  cast  our  eyes  upon  the 
variety  of  improved  versions  and  modern  paraphrases,  and  observe 
in  them  the  prevalence  of  party  views,  and  discordant  expositions, 
we  are  greatly  in  despair,  not  only  of  obtaining  a  better,  but  even  of 
seeing  as  good,  from  any  modern  hands.  We  have  in  the  course  of 
our  readuig  met  with  an  anecdote  which  may  serve,  perhaps,  to  al- 
lay in  some  degree  the  feverish  propensity  for  improvements. 
Walton,  in  his  life  of  Bishop  Sanderson,  says,  that  before  Sanderson's 
elevation  he  accompanied  "  Dr.  Kilbic,  who  was  one  of  the  transla- 
tors of  the  Bible  in  King  James's  time,  into  Derbyshire,  and  they 
being  together  on  a  Sunday  at  a  parish  church,  found  there  a  young 
preacher,  who  bad  no  more  discretion,  than  to  waste  a  great  part 


141 

cency  with  which  tlie  Reviewer  lias  laid  down  a  train 
for  them  to  take  up  and  believe.  He  accuses  the  Re- 
formers of  endeavouring  ^^  to  perpetuate  the  Idind 
doctrine  of  destiny/'  as  if  he  was  ignorant,  that  Unita- 
riansj — modern  and  distinguished  Unitarians, — had 
advocated  the  stupid  as  well  as  blind,  doctrines  of  mate- 
terialism,  and  its  consequent,  necessity  ;  between  which, 
and  the  highest  ground  of  Calvinism,  we  leave  to  him 
to  discriminate,  heedless  for  ourselves,  as  to  whicli  he 
receives  or  condemns. *^     In  the  conclusion  of  iiis  specu- 

of  the  hour  allotted  to  the  Sermon,  in  exceptions  ag^ainst  the  late 
translation  of  several  words,  and  shewed  three  reasons  why 
a  particular  word  should  have  heen  differently  translated. 
When  the  service  was  ended,  the  preacher  was  invited  to  the 
house  of  the  doctor's  friend,  where  after  some  other  conference 
the  doctor  t©ld  him  that  he  might  have  preached  more  usefid  doc- 
trines, and  not  have  filled  his  auditor's  ears  with  needless  exceptions 
against  the  late  translation  ;  and  as  for  the  word,  for  which  he  of- 
fered his  poor  congregation  three  reasons  why  it  ought  to  have 
been  translated  as  he  said  ;  he  and  others  had  considered  all  of 
them,  and  found  thirteen  more  considerable  reasons,  why  it  was 
translated  as  now  printed."  The  unlearned  Christian  may  be 
satisfied  with  his  own  Bible  till  he  finds  the  learned  ahle  to  agree 
upon  a  new  translation.  The  reader  who  would  wish  to  see  the 
opinions  of  Bishop  Middleton,  Dr.  Doddridge,  and  Dr.  John  Taylor, 
of  Norwich,  (an  Arian)  is  referred  to  IIorne'*s  Deism  Refuted, 
note  2. 

*  We  have  before  us  a  little  volume,  entitled,  "  The  doctrine 
of  predestination  unto  life  explained  and  vindicated  in  four  Sei- 
mons,  preached  to  the  church  of  Christ,  meeting  in  Brattle-street, 
(Boston,)  and  published  at  their  general  desire.  By  Williana 
Cooper,  one  of  the  Pastors  of  said  church.  With  a  preface  by 
the  senior  Pastors  of  the  town  of  Boston."  "  This  doctrine," 
they  say,  "  is  embraced  by  «5,  as  it  was  by  the  Reformers  from 
popery,  because  we  find  it  in  our  Bible.     This  it  is,  that  makes  us 


145 

latioii  he  argues,  as  wc  think,  less  against  the  value  of 
creeds  than  in  favour  of  a  principle,  which  yet,  we  can- 
not suppose  he  will  adopt, — tlie  depravity  of  man.  Wc 
should  like  to  know  by  what  principle  it  is,  that  every 
man  is  to  be  permitted  to  mistake  the  conclusions  of  his 
own  mind  for  the  immutable  decreeof  truth?  To  adoptthe 
Reviewer's  own  simile,  ^^  it  would  be  as  promising  an 
attempt  to  dam  the  ocean,  or  hold  a  comet  with  a  kite 
string,*'  as  to  ascertain  under  such  circumstances,  that 
trutii  is  consistent  with  itself  The  natural  tendency 
of  the  human  mind  is,  not  to  truth  but  to  error, — "  the 
imagination  of  man's  heart  is  evil  from  his  youth,"  and, 
we  think,  the  Reviev/er  concedes  something  to  this 
principle,  when  he  ventures  to  predict  what  may  occur 
to  the  Andover  Institution. 

The  Reviewer  passes  over  Mr.  Sparks's  chapters  on 
the  Trinity,  with  a  general  commendation,  (we  sup- 
pose, of  all  that  they  contain,)  and  the  observation, 
that  *"  he  shall  he  happy,  at  some  future  time,  to  find 
an  opportunity  to  recur  to  them."  This  is  all  very 
well.  We  are  inclined  to  the  opinion,  that  the  Unita- 
rian side  of  the  question  is  getting  somewhat  stale,   even 

Predestinarians  and  Calvinists  :  for  Calvin,  nor  Augustine,  nor  any 
names  whatever,  are  any  thing-  to  us,  but  as  they  speak  to  us  from, 
the  Holy  Scriptures.  These  are  our  only  oracles.  What  we  find 
there  we  believe  and  profess,  though  incomprehensible  to  our 
weak  and  shallow  minds,  which  are  by  no  means  the  measure  of 
truth.  And  we  think  we  act  a  perfectly  rational,  as  well  as  rever- 
ent part  before  the  High  God,  the  inlinite  intelligence,  in  bowing 
our  understandings  to  his  revelations  respecting  truth  and  duty, 
even  where  we  cannot  answer  every  scruple  or  objection  for  the 
reconciling  seeming  oppositions."  Signed  by  Coleman,  (Cooper's 
colleague)  Sewall,  Prince,  Le  Mercier.  and  Webb.    April  15. 1 7 10. 

19 


146 

in  Boston ;  its  novelty  is  wearing  off ;  and  it  is  in  a  nem 
field,  where  the  liabit  of  thinking  has  been  different, 
and  where  the  novelty  of  the  subject  will,  doubtless,  pro- 
cure it  some  attention,  that  it  may  be  discussed  to  most 
advantage  ;  a  random  ray  may  there,  perhaps,  fall  on 
some  eye  not  wholly  averted,  and  the  happy  man  may 
discover,  or  think  tliat  he  discovers,  more  of  the  nature 
of  God,  than  he  knows  of  his  own. 

We  are  now  come  to  a  subject  on  which  we  enter  with 
real  pain,  because  it  relates  to  errors  aud  infirmities 
which  we,  most  willingly,  would  give  to  oblivion.  We 
confess  we  feel  much  disturbed  in  the  complacency  we 
have  hitherto  been  desirous  of  feeling  towards  the  Re- 
viewer on  all  the  points  of  this  controversy.  But  we 
will  sU'ive  to  be  temperate, — we  are  determined  to  be 
just. 

The  Reformation  in  England  is  not  to  be  considered 
as  having  attained  a  settled  character,  till  after  the  ac- 
cession of  Elizabeth.  This  we  conceive  will  be  admit- 
ted :  it  would  detain  us  too  long  to  enlarge  upon  it. 
The  nation  generally  was  then  satisfied.  No  opposi- 
tion was  made,  except  by  those  who  still  adhered  to 
the  Chiu'ch  of  Rome.  If  the  principles  of  the  Church 
at  that  time  were  not  perfectly  satisfactory  to  the  other 
reformed  churches,  yet  there  was,  on  their  part,  no  op- 
position to  them.  This  state  of  harmony  was  not, 
however,  of  long  duration,  for  when  those  who  had 
been  driven  by  the  fear  of  Mary,  to  different  parts  of 
the  continent  successively  returned,  many  of  them  mani- 
fested an  attachment  to  the  forms  of  protestantism  which 
they  had  severally  witnessed.     It  was  not,  however, 


147 

till  the  lOtli  year  of  Elizabeth,  that  they  begaa  to  (Us* 
play  themselves  openly,  and  from  this  time,  notwith- 
standing the  efibrts  made  to  check  them,  till  tlie  time  of 
Charles  I.  they  continued  to  increase.  In  the  18th  of 
this  reign  (1643)  the  famous  solemn  league  and 
COVENANT  was  framed  in  Scotland,  and  subscribed  by 
multitudes  both  in  that  country  and  in  England  ;  the 
person  subscribing,  at  the  same  time  solemnly  swore 
"  with  his  hands  lifted  up  to  the  Most  High  God/'  to 
endeavour  the  entire  extirpation  of  prelacy,  or  the 
government  of  the  Church  by  Archbishops  and 
Bishops  :  and  all  the  ecclesiastical  qjficeps  depending 
on  that  hierarchy.  Both  churcli  and  state  were  brought 
to  the  dust  by  this  horrible  league  of  superstition  and 
tyranny.  The  profession  of  Episcopacy  Avas,  for  a 
long  time,  not  even  tolerated.  Even  the  King,  while  a 
prisoner  in  the  Isle  of  Wight,  was  prohibited  the  use  of 
the  Common  Prayer  Book  in  his  own  family.  Near 
twenty  thousand  clergymen  were  actually  turned 
out  to  beggary  and  want,  and,  as  if  this  was  not  de- 
gradation enough,  it  was  endeavoured  to  attach  epithets 
of  infamy  to  their  persons.*     This  course  of  things 

*  "  The  severities  exercised  against  the  Episcopal  clergy," 
says  Hume,  "  naturally  affected  the  royalists,  and  even  all  men  of 
candour^  in  a  sensible  manner.  By  the  most  moderate  computation 
above  one  half  oi  the  established  clergy  were  turned  out  for  no. 
other  crime  than  their  adhering  to  the  civil  and  religious  princi- 
ples in  which  they  had  been  educated,  and  for  their  attachment  to 
those  laws,  under  whose  countenance  they  had  at  tirst  embraced 
that  profession.  To  renounce  Episcopacy  and  the  Liturgy,  and 
to  subscribe  the  Covenant,  were  the  only  terms  which  could  save 
them  from  so  rigourous  a  fate  ;  and  if  the  least  mark  o( -malignancy 
as  it  was  called,   or  affection  t©  the  King,   who  so  eutirely  loved 


148 

did  not  last  many  years.     In  1660,  the  Church  was 
re-established,   on  the  return  of  tlie  King ;    and  the 

them,  escaped  their  lips,  even  this  hard  choice  was  not  permit- 
ted." And  in  a  note,  referring  to  Walker's  account  of  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  clergy,  he  adds  :  "  the  Parliament  pretended  to  leave 
to  the  sequestered  clergy  one  ffth  of  their  revenue,  but  this 
author  makes  it  suffi«iently  clear,  that  this  provision,  small  as  it 
was,  was  never  regularly  paid  the  ejected  clergy."  History  of 
England,  Baltimore  edition,  vol.  vi.  p.  123.  These  acts  of  oppres- 
sion were  performed  by  a  committee  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
which  continued  to  sit  for  several  years,  and  was  denominated  the 
committee  o(  scand^aloiis  ministers.  "  The  proceedings  were  cruel 
and  arbitrary,  and  made  great  havoc,  both  to  the  Church,  and  to 
the  University.  They  began  with  harrassing,  imprisoning,  and 
molesting  the  clergy,  and  ended  with  sequestrating  and  ejecting 
them.  In  order  to  add  contumely  to  cruelty,  they  gave  the  suffer- 
ers the  ephithet  of  scandalous^  and  endeavoured  to  render  them 
as  odious  as  they  were  miserahle.  The  greatest  vices,  however, 
which  they  could  reproach  to  a  great  part  of  them,  were  bowing 
to  the  name  of  Jesus,  &c."  Ibid.  vol.  v.  p.  359.  Afterward  came 
the  ordinance  of  Cromwell  in  1G51,  and  swept  from  their  churches 
the  remainder  of  the  Episcopal  clergy.  The  follov/ing  extracts 
from  the  Journal  of  John  Evelyn,  Esq.  whose  character  is  well 
known,  and  who  was  contemporary  with  the  times  alluded  to,  may 
be  found  in  the  Quarterly  Review  for  April,  1810,  and  will  serve 
to  elucidate  the  note  at  the  hottom  of  page  59,  of  the  Review  be- 
fore us.  "  Dec.  7. — This  day  came  forth  the  Protector's  edict,  or 
proclamation,  prohibiting  all  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England 
from  preaching  or  teaching  any  schools,  in  which  he  imitated  the 
apostate  Julian."  "  25th. — I  went  to  London,  when  Dr.  Wilde 
preached  the  funeral  sermon  of  preaching,  this  being  the  last  day, 
after  which  Cromwell's  proclamation  was  to  take  place,  that  7ione 
of  the  Church  of  England  should  dare  either  to  preach,  or  administer 
sacraments,  teach  school,  ^c.  on  pain  of  imprisonment  or  exile.'''' 
The  reader  will  perceive  that  the  "  convenient  time,"  which  the 
Reviewer  says  was  allowed  for  their  removal,  was  from  the 
seventh  to  the  twenty-fifth  of  December, 


149 

Puvitans  suftered  in  their  turn.  Most  of  those  who 
came  into  power  had  felt  the  effects  of  tiie  spirit  of 
Puritanism,  and,  perhaps,  were  not  so  lenient  as  they 
sliould  have  heea,  placed  as  they  now  were  ahove  its 
influence.  Endeavours  for  conciliation  were  certainly 
made  on  the  i)art  of  the  Church,  for  which  there  was  no 
precedent  on  the  other  side.  At  the  Conference  in  the 
Savoy,  held  by  order  of  the  King,  it  was  easy  to  be 
seen,  that  little  less  was  to  be  required  than  allowing 
Baxter  to  remodel  the  Church  and  its  Liturgy.  Whatever 
disposition  existed  on  the  part  of  the  Church  for  concilia- 
tion there  was  certainly  none  on  the  other  side.  ^^  They 
were  however,"  says  l^ishop  Burnet,  "  divided  among 
themselves.  Some  were  for  insisting  only  on  a  few  im- 
portant things,  reckoning  that  if  they  were  gsined,  and 
a  union  followed,  it  would  be  easy  to  gain  other  things 
afterward.  But  all  this  was  overthrown  by  Mr.  Baxter. 
There  was  a  great  submission  paid  to  him  by  the  whole 
party.  So  he  persuaded  them  that  from  the  words  of 
the  commission,  they  were  bound  to  offer  every  thing 
that  they  thought  might  conduce  to  the  good,  or  peace 
of  the  Church,  without  consideruig  what  was  likely  to 
be  obtained,  or  what  effect  their  demanding  so  much 
luisiht  have  in  irritatina;  the  minds  of  those  who  were 
then  their  superiour  body,  both  in  strength  and  num- 
ber."* This  inexorable  disposition,  was  not  only 
manifested  by  them,  at  the  Conference,  but  they  were  also 
in  the  habit  of  speaking  and  preaching  openly  against 
the  Church  from  wliich  tliey  derived  their  subsistence. 
No  alternative  luing  left  to  the  Church,  but,  either  to 
tolerate  a  Babel  within  itself,  by  allowing  these  practi- 

*  'History  of  his  own  lime,  vol.  i.  p.  ISO, 


150 

ces  to  continue,  or  to  require  conformity,  the  act  of  uni- 
formity was  passed,   containing  restrictions,  perhaps, 
unnecessarily  severe,  though  but  in  strict  retaliation  for 
the   measures  of  tlie   Puritans.     It  Avas   expected,  too, 
that  the  larger  portion  of  the  party,  would  not  fall  under 
the  restriction,   but  that,   in  general,  they  would  con- 
form ;    "those  however,     who   led   the  party,"  says 
Burnet,*  '•  took  great  pains  to  make  them  all  stick  to- 
gether.    They  infused  it  into  them,  that  if  great  num- 
bers stood  out,   it  would  show  their  strengtii,  and  pro- 
duce new  laws  in  their  favour,  whereas,  they  would  be 
despised,  if,  after  so  much  noise  made,  the  greater  part 
of  them  should  conform.     So  it  v/as  thought  many  went 
out  in  the  croud  to  keep  their  friends  company."     They 
still  continued,  however,  to  preach  whenever  opportuni- 
ty was   given  them,  and  no  farther  restrictions  were 
imposed,   till   during  the  plague  at  London,  when  the 
Court  and  Parliament  being  removed  to  Oxford,  some 
of  the  ejected  ministers  intruded  themselves  into  some 
vacant  pulpits  in  London,  and  openly  reflected  on  the 
the   Court.     ^'  This,"    says  Burnet,  *'  was  represented 
very  odiously  at  Oxford,"  and  it  produced  a  law  ban- 
ishing them  five  miles  from  any  church,  &c.  in  which 
they  had  before  served  ;  a  measure  which   ive  do  not 
undertake  to  justify,  though  it  will  be  extremely  diffi- 
cult to  show,  that  it  was  as  unjustifiable  as  the  previous 
conduct  of  the   Puritans  themselves,  when   in  power. 
A  more  effectual  method  of  checking  their  oppositiou 
was  afterAvard  found.     In  1672,   an  order  was  passed 
in  council,  for  paying  a  yearly  pension  of  fifty  pounds 
to  most  of  the  deprived  ministers,  and  a  hundred  pounds 

*  Ibid.  vol.  i.p.  192.     See  also  Hu^e,  vol.  vi.  p.  370. 


151 

to  the  leaders  of  the  party.  Baxter  declined,  but  most  of 
them  accepted  it.  J3isliop  Burnet  says  that  UishopStilling- 
flcet  assured  him  tl»is  was  true.  ^*  And  thus,"  he  adds, 
^•'  tlie  Court  hired  them  to  be  silent  and  the  greatest 
jmrt  of  them  were  so,  and  weiv.  very  compliant.^'  Dr. 
lleyuolds  was  prevailed  on  to  accept  a  Bishoprick.*^ 
It  is  easily  seen  how  Baxter  played  the  part  of  a  Bishop, 
notwithstanding  his  hitter  opposition  to  the  name  and 
office.  In  Scotland,  Archbisliup  Leighton  laboured 
liard  and  long,  to  produce  conciliation  but  in  vain.\ 
The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  was  the  shibboleth 
by  which  all  true  religion  was  to  be  testetl,  and,  rather 
than  yield  even  the  most  atrocious  of  its  oblisrations  its 
disciples  resorted  to  arms  and  bloodshed.  The  fero- 
cious spirit  which  was  manifested  in  that  war,  by  these 
men,  is  well  known. 

We  may  now  see  what  leaven  it  was  whicli,  workin"' 
Avithin  tlie  very  l)osom  of  the  Church,  called  for  the 
expurgatory  act  of  iiniformity.  And  yet  because  of 
this, — because  she  did  not,  at  a  period  now  remote, 
succumb  to  these  mistaken  men  so 

"  True  to  the  jingling  of  their  leaders  bells  ;" 

the  English  Church  is   now    accused   of  delaying  the 
progress  of  the  reformation  !  For  not  folding  their  arms 

*  Ibid.  vol.  i.  p.  308.     Hume,  vol.  vi.  p.  371. 

t  Archbishop  Leighton,  will  be  at  once  allowed,  we  believe,  to 
have  been  a  man  of  the  purest  piety,  of  tolerant  principles,  and  of 
eminent  learning.  He  was  educated  in  the  severest  prejudices 
against  the  English  church,  and  conformed  to  it  from  principle. 
His  character  and  his  patient  etforts  to  produce  peace  in  the 
Church  of  Scotland  may  be  found  detailed  in  Burnet's  Historv 
above  quoted,  vol.  i.  p.  134. — et  passim. 


152 

wliile  tlie  rights  which  primitive  Christianity  hatl  given 
thein  were  sought  to  be  trampled  under  foot,  her  clergy 
are  accused  of  fettering  the  gospel  !  For  not  casting 
herself,  without  an  oar,  on  the  boundless  sea  of  preju- 
dice and  fantasy,  she  is  charged  with  having  broke  the 
spirit  of  the  reformation  !  And  noble,  pure,  and  self- 
devoting  as  this  spirit  is  allowed  to  have  been,  yet,  she 
is  accused  of  having  corrupted  it  with  "  store  of  mitres  !'' 
But  cold  must  it  have  become  ere  such  a  bawble 
could  have  so  strong  attraction.  For  ciiecking  the 
spirit  of  enthusiasm  and  fanaticism,  which  would  have 
swept  away  every  thing  which  the  mind  had  valued  in 
religion  because  it  was  not  iieiv^  or  not  fanatical y  she  is 
in  this  enlightened  age  stigmatised  as  intolerant  and 
parricidal  !  Onr  opponents  feel  no  hesitation  in 
making  the  sweeping  declaration,  that  these  restless,  in- 
tolerant spirits  ; — these  men  who  had  so  mucli  of  fanati- 
cism, and  nothing  of  moderation  in  their  disposition, 
were,  in  one  general  assertion,  "  the  best  scholars, 
preachers  and,''  even,  '^  men  in  the  nation  !*'  We  turn 
with  loathing  from  such  disgusting  adulation.^" 

The  identity  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal   Church, 
with  the  Church  of  England,   "  in  doctrine,  worship, 

*  "  The  writer  of  the  Magnalia,"  says  Dr.  Eliot,  "  divides  into 
three  classes  the  eminent  preachers  who  emigrated  to  New-Eng- 
land. The  first  were  in  the  exercise  of  the  ministry  when  they  came 
over.  They  were  educated  either  at  Oxford  or  Cambridge.  The 
second  class  comprehends  those  whose  education  was  uniinished, 
and  had  only  such  advantages  to  complete  it,  as  they  could  obtain 
in  the  plantations.  The  third  consisted  of  those  who  were  ejected  ^ 
from  the  ministry,  after  the  restoration  of  the  monarchy  and  establish- 
ment of  the  Episcopal  church.  They  were  pious  and  good  men ; 
but  in  their  literary  accomplishments  they  were  not  superior  to 
those  who  were  educated  at  Harvard  College^  <^c.'" 


153 

and  discipline,"  has  been  officially  declared.*  We 
do  not,  however,  suppose  that  we  are  obliged  to  answer 
every  cliarge  wliichthe  ignorant,  or  the  calumnious  may 
advance.  We  see  nothing  to  approve  in  the  circum 
stance  of  her  connection  with  the  civil  power ;  for  thougli 
she  may  have  derived  some  certain  advantage  from  that 
connection,  yet  it  lias  also  been  productive  to  her  of 
evils  of  no  light  or  transient  character.  In  our  descent 
from,  and  communion  with,  the  English  Church,  we  have 
much  reason  to  be  proud.  She  was  the  bulwark  of  the 
reformation.  To  her  early  labours,  were  even  the 
Puritans  indebted,  for  the  first  dawn  upon  them  of 
Christian  liberty.  Her  Homilies,  the  preaching  of  her 
ministers,  and  the  use  of  her  Liturgy,  gave  them  the  first 
knowledge  they  possessed  of  the  gospel  of  truth.  The 
first  use  which  they  made  of  the  light  she  had  shed 
upon,  and  the  liberty  she  had  wrought  for  them,  was 
to  turn  upon  her,  and  seek  to  drive  her  from  her  altars. 
Cranmer,  and  Latimer,  and  Ridley,  and  Hooper,  with 
all  those  noble  spirits  who  had  given  their  lives  for  the 
establishment  of  Christian  truth,  had  they  lived  to 
the  days  of  the  Puritans,  would  have  found  Gardi- 
ners,  and  Eonners,  in  the  other  extreme  of  error, 
who  would  readily  have  stript  them  of  their  dignities, 
and  have  deprived  them,  even  in  their  closets,  of  the 
use  of  that  Liturgy,  which  some  of  them  had  aided  in 
preparing.  It  v,as  no  half  way  measure  which  these 
men  sought :  mere  toleration  was,  to  their  conception, 
no  better  than  nonexistence.  They  were  to  be  the 
dominant  church, — they  were  to  possess  the  livings  of 
the  country, — Episcopacy  was  to  be  entirely  extir- 

*  Sep  Journals  of  General  Convention,  p.    310. 
20 


151 

FATED.  AVlien  at  length  the  Church  was  overthrown, 
what  special  form  was  to  appear  in  its  stead  ?  Behold^ 
among  the  Puritans  sixty  different  sects  rise  up  ;  all 
of  them  claiming  to  found  their  principles  on  the  scrip- 
tures ;  and  all  of  them  setting  up  exclusive  claims  to 
correctness  : — the  Church  of  Christ  become  but  another 
name  for  gross  fanaticism,  and  interminable  confusion  : 
religion  wholly  obscured,  if  not  overwhelmed,  the  Uni- 
versities disgorged  of  their  baneful  learning, — and  Eng- 
land herself  sitting  down  by  Babel  of  old  to  learn  wis- 
dom in  melancholy  experience. 

The  Reviewer  brings  forward  some  general  charges 
against  the  Englisli  Church,  of  too  gross  and  abusive  a 
character  to  do  her  injury.  He  who  can  descend  to  use 
such  language  against  a  Christian  Church  so  fully  in 
the  view  of  all  the  world,  carries  along  with  him  his 
own  refutation.*  He  alludes  in  the  course  of  them, 
rather  obscurely  to  the  attempt  made  iu  1772  to  obtain  a 
repeal  of  the  act  requiring  subscription  to  the  Thirty- 
nine  articles.  At  that  time  there  were  about  Eighteen 
Thousand  Clergymen  in  England,  and  yet  but  two  hun- 
dred and  fifty  were  prevailed  on  to  sign  the  petition! 
Some,  it  seems,  and  therefore,  we  should  think,  not  of 
the  ivovtliiest,  were  desirous  to  enjoy  the  livings  of  the 
Church,  while  they  wished  to  be  released  from  the  con- 
trol of  her  principles.  Dr.  Paley,  though  applied  to  for 
the  purpose,  refused  to  sign  this  petition. 

*  Those  of  our  readers  who  niiiy  wish  to  see  a  candid  and  tem- 
perate examination  of  the  Dissenting  Gentleman's  Letters,  from 
which  the  Reviewer  gives  a  long  extract  in  a  note,  containing  ex- 
aggerated, and  as  we  have  shown,  in  some  instances,tm<rMe  accounts, 
are  referred  to  the  fifth  chapter  of  Jones  of  Nayland's  Essay  on 
the  Church. 


155 

We  are  yet  to  learn  what  assistance  the  Puritans  ren- 
dered the  English  Church  in  its  struggle  against  Popery. 
They  were  unknown  as  a  body  till  after  the  settlement 
of  the  Church  in  the  time  of  Elizabeth  :  while  this  was 
eftecting  they  were  waiting  the  event  abroad.  After 
this  period  there  was  no  apparent  danger  from  popery 
till  the  time  of  James  II.  and  during  that  reign^  we 
believe  only  a  solitary  tract  by  Pendlebury  was  pub- 
lished. "  The  Clergy  of  the  Church^^^  says  Burnet, 
*^  wrote  and  iiiiblisheil  genevallij  a^^ainst  jioperij,  which 
however  the  dissenters  did  not.''^'  As  Puritanism  was 
not  its  ally  against  popery,  so,  neither  did  the  Church 
oppress  it  till  it  had  lifted  its  own  parricidal  arm  against 
lier.  No  !  Puritanism  looked  on  when  Protestantism 
was  in  danger,  and  then  aimed  to  destroy  the  buhvark, 
which  had  stood  between  it  and  the  flames  ! . 

Plainer  proof  is  desirable,  than  any  we  have  yet 
seen,  to  satisfy  us  that  the  ministers  who  were  deprived 
by  Archbishop  Laud  were  all  excellent  men.  Tiiat  all 
of  them  were  "  parricidal"  in  their  conduct  toward  the 
Church,  is  not  to  be  denied.  The  heat  and  bitterness  of 
the  Puritans,  almost  necessarily  produced  opposition  to 
their  demands.  And  even  if  the  charge,  against  Arch- 
bishop Laud,  of  intolerance  and  persecution  could  be 
supported  upon  unequivocal  s,i'omn\.  surely,  some  atone- 
ment to  society  may  be  supposed  to  have  l)een  made,  in 
the  sacrifice  of  his  life^  by  those  who  were  alike  the  ene- 
mies of  his  Churchy  and  his  jJerson.-f 

*  History  of  his  own  timci:,  vol.  i.  p.  673. — Milboiirne'^s  Lcgacv 
to  the  Church  of  England,  vol.  ii.  p.  1G2. 

t  "  This  blemish  [intemperate  zeal]  is  more  to  be  regarded  as  a 
general  imputation  on  the  whole  age,  than  any  particular  failing  of 
Laud's,  and  it   is  sufficient   for  his  vindication  to  observe  that  hb 


156 

We  see  then  that  tlie  spirit  of  persecution  Avas  visible 
among  the  Puritans,  as  well  as  in  the  English  Church  : 
and  yet  one  would  suppose,  from  reading  the  eulogies 
of  such  writers  as  this  Reviewer,  that  these  men  had 
been  sufferers  only,  and  had  never  sought  to  give  any 
measure  of  retribution,  worthy  of  more  notice  than  a 
line  or  two,  in  passing.  Trace  now  the  facts.  In  the 
reign  of  Charles  1.  three  hundred  (we  take  the  Review- 
er's numbers)  ministers  were  deprived,  for  denying  the 
validity  of  the  Episcopal  aulhority  exercised  over  them, 
and  refusing  submission  to  the  laws  of  the  Church,  and 
of  the  country,  by  which  all  the  rest  were  content  to 
be  bound.  Wlien  this  party,  on  the  other  hand,  came 
into  power,  they  cast  out,  with  contumeli/,  to  beggary 
and  want,  near  twenty  tJiousand,  that  is,  all  the  clergy 
of  the  realm,  who  would  not  openly  forswear  the 
Church,  to  which,  at  her  own  altars,  they  had  solemnly 
vowed  to  adhere.     When  the  Church  again   obtained 

errors  were  the  most  excusable  of  all  those  which  prevailed  during 
that  zealous  period."  Huine,  vol.  vi.  p.  80.  Again.  "  That 
Laud's  severity  was  not  extreme  appears  trom  the  fact  that  he 
caused  the  acts  or  records  of  the  high  commission  court  to  be 
searched,  and  that  there  had  been  fewer  suspensions,  deprivations 
and  other  punishments  by  three  during  the  seven  years  of  his  time, 
than  in  any  seven  years  of  his  predecessor  Abbot.  1  own  that  it 
is  very  questionable  whether  persecution  can  in  any  case  be  justi- 
fied :  But  at  the  same  time  it  would  be  hard  to  give  that  appella- 
tion to  Laud's  conduct,  who  only  enforced  the  act  of  uniformity, 
and  expelled  the  clergymen  that  accepted  of  benefices  and  yet  re- 
fused to  observe  the  ceremonies  which  they  previously  knew  to 
be  enjoined  by  law.  He  never  refused  them  separate  places  of 
worship,  because  they  would  have  esteemed  it  impious  to  demand 
them,  and  no  less  impious  to  allow  them."'  Ibid.  vol.  vi.  7iote  [D.] 
end  of  the  volume. 


157 

authority,  tlirougli  the  free  will  of  the  nation ;  two 
thousand  were  ejected  for  requiring  tlie  Church  to  over- 
turn her  whole  fahric  ;  which  they  utterly  despised,  and 
many  of  them  had  sworn  to  extirpate.  And  yet  the 
Church  of  England  is  represented  as  a  persecutor,  and 
the  Dissenters  are  only  "  not  to  be  acquitted  of  a  perse- 
cuting spirit,"  while  many  of  them  are  the  best  and  the 
worthiest  of  men.  Do  we  undertake  to  approve  the 
severities  which  the  Church  exercised  ?  Far  be  it  from 
Us  to  do  so.  Neither  can  we  approve  the  conduct  of 
those,  who  from  mere  imrty  motives  can,  in  our  day, 
represent  these  matters  in  such  unjust  colors.  '*  The 
truth  is,"  as  Bishop  Jewel  says  in  the  preface  to  his 
Apology  for  the  Churcli  of  England,  "  this  Church  has 
been  iiersecuted,  because  she  alone,  of  all  the  Churches 
in  Europe,  has  had  the  blessing  and  singular  favour  of 
God  to  reform  with  prudence,  moderation,  and  an  exact 
and  regular  conduct ;  after  great  and  wise  deliberation, 
by  the  consent  of  our  Bishops,  Convocations,  States, 
and  Princes,  without  tumults  or  hasty  counsels.  So 
that  the  Pa2;?sfi.'  themselves  do  even  envy  our  primitive 
doctrine,  government,  and  discipline,  and  both  fear  and 
hate  us  more  than  any  other  of  the  reformed  churches- 
They  are  the  same  things  that  have  raised  the  spleens 
and  animosities  on  the  other  side,  w  ith  whom  whatever  is 
older  than  Zuinglius  and  Calvin,  is  presently  ^70/>er^ 
and  must  be  destroyed.  Tell  them  that  Episcopacy 
was  settled  in  all  churches  in  the  days  of  the  very  Apos- 
tles, and  by  them  ;  and  they  reply  that  the  mystery  of 
iniquity  began  then  to  v»  ork  ;  intimating  if  not  affirming, 
that  this  Holy  Order  was  a  part  of  it." 

Let  us  now  turn  to  our  own  country,  and  see  whether 
ihoee.  wh^,   as  it  is  nov/  technicalhj  said,  ^^  fled  from 


158 

persecution/' — those  "who  went  out  into  a  wilderness  to 
establish  Christian  liberty,  adopted  more  enlightened 
principles,  or  pursued  a  more  tolerant  course. 

The  first  settlers  of  Plymouth  were  part  of  the  con- 
gregation of  Robinson  at  Leydcn.  This  congregation 
was  not,  we  believe,  composed  entirely  of  those  who 
fled  from  the  persecution  of  the  English  j^^^otestant 
Church.  If  we  are  not  mistaken,  many  of  them  were 
the  remnant  or  the  descendants,  of  those  who  left 
England  on  the  accession  of  Mary.  They  were 
first  collected  by  Robert  Brown,  whom  we  liave 
before  alluded  to,  and  who  left  England  with  a 
few  others  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth.  In  1610, 
John  Robinson,  a  non-conformist  minister,  who  had 
had  been  deprived  in  England  at  a  time  when  as  we 
may  say,  on  the  authority  of  Hume,  '^  the  execution  of 
the  laws  was  tempered  with  humanity,"  came  among 
them.  ^'  This  toell-meaning  man,"  says  Moshiem, 
*•  perceiving  the  defects  which  reigned  in  the  discipline 
of  Brown,  and  in  the  spirit  and  temjjer  of  his  followers, 
employed  his  zeal  and  diligence  in  correcting  them,  and 
in  modelling  anew  the  society,  in  such  a  manner,  as  to 
render  it  less  odious  to  his  adversaries,  and  less  li^jblc 
to  the  just  censure  of  those  true  Christians  who  looked 
upon  charity  as  the  end  of  the  commandment."*  In 
1620,  a  part  of  this  congregation  embarked  for  America. 
The  motives  which  led  to  this  removal  do  not  appear  to 
have  haen  purely  religious,  as  they  are  often  represent- 
ed ;  and  many  of  those  who  emigrated  had,  probably, 
spent  most  of  their  days  in  Holland.     Their  number  was 

*  Eccles.  His.  vol.  v.  p.  405.  These  we  believe  are  all  or 
nearly  all  the  particulars  of  this  man's  life  which  have  come  down 
to  us. 


159 

ttiie  hundred  and  one.  The  next  yetiYCSimethirty-Jive,a.nd 
tlie  year  succeeding,  s/it?^y.-  Both  these  parties,  we  believe, 
consisted  chiefly  of  adventurers  from  England.  Among 
these  emigrants,  there  happened  unfortunately  for  him, 
to  be  a  clergyman  whose  name  was  Lyford,  and  at  a 
lime, — according  to  Trumbull,* — when  this  little 
colony  was  enduring  ^'  the  sad  experience  of  famine," 
in  a  w  ilderness  ;  when  "  the  best  dish,"  which  they 
w'ere  able  to  furnish  this  last  company  of  emigrants, 
was  "  a  lobster  without  bread,  or  any  other  article,  ex- 
cept a  cup  of  fair  spring  water,"  religious  animosity 
could,  so  far  operate  upon  them,  that  Lyford,  and  a  Mr. 
Oldham  "  were  discharged  from  having  any  thing  more 
to  do  at  Plymouth  ;*'  in  other  words, — they  were  ordered 
to  ''^  go  into  another  icildernesSy'^  and  they, — at  the  risk 
of  starvation,^ — were  obliged  to  do  so."t 

The  next  settlement  was  made  at  Salem,  in  1629. 
The  settlers  were  from  England.  Here,  as  we  have 
before  stated,  was  formed  the  ^rs^  completely  organized 
church  in  New-England.  Thirty  laymen  ordained  a 
pastor,  and  a  teacher,  and  the  Governor  of  Plymouth 
gave  them  the  right  hand  of  fellowship.  It  so  happen- 
ed that  among  this  colony,  there  were  two  gentlemen 
named  Brow  n.  These  gentlemen,  disliking  this  pro- 
cedure, were  so  imprudent  as  to  express  their  dislike, 
and  to  charge  the  persons  concerned  with  a  separation 
from  the  Church  of  England  ;  refusing  themselves  to 
participate  in  it,  and  introducing  the  use  of  the  Liturgy. 

*  History  of  the  United  States,  vol.  i.  pp.  69-81. 

t  Topographical  and  Histoi-ical  description  of  Boston  :  By 
Charles  Sha^^;  Esq.  member  of  the  Americau  Antiquarian  Society, 
p.  15. 


160 

Here  was  room  for  the  exercise  of  toleration.  15ut  no  such 
jjestilent  heresy  was  to  be  tolernted  :  The  colony  con- 
sisted of  three  or  four  hundred,  and  it  might  spread 
among  them.  The  Governor,  therefore,  rather  cavalier- 
ly told  them,  that  "  New-England  was  no  place  for 
such  as  tliey,"  and  therefore  they,  and  their  prayer 
books,  were  sent  back  to  England,  in  the  very  ships 
which  had  brought  them  out.* 

Governor  Winthrop's  colony,  which  settled  Boston 
and  the  neighbouring  towns,  was  much  the  largest,  and 
most  respectable,  we  believe,  of  those  which  came  out 
at  any  one  time.  In  this  company  were  four  English 
non-conformist  clergymen,  who,  a  few  months  after  tlieir 
arrival, — no  regard  being  paid  to  their  Episcopal  ordi- 
nation,— were  required  to  submit  to  a  lay  ordination  af- 
ter the  Salem  plan,  before  they  could  be  considered  as 
entitled  to  the  charge  of  their  respective  churches. 

MiNOT,  speaking  of  these  colonists,  says,  ^'whilst  they 
scrupulously  regulated  the  morals  of  the  inhabitants 
within  the  colony  ;  and  offered  it  as  an  asylum  to  the 
oppressed  among  mankind,  they  neglected  not  to  pre- 
vent the  contagion  of  dissimilar  habits,  and  heretical 
opinions  from  without.  A  law  was  made  in  1637,  that 
none  should  be  received  to  inhabit  within  the  jurisdic- 
tion, but  such  as  should  be  allowed  by  some  of  the 
magistrates  ;  and  it  was  fully  understood  that  differing 
from  the  religion  generally  received  in  the  country,  was 
as  great  a  disqualification  as  any  political  opinions 
whatever.  No  man  could  be  qualified  to  elect,  or  be 
elected,  to  any  oflBce,  who  was  not  a  church  member,  and 

*  New-England's  Memorial,  p.  85,  quoted  in  the  Churchman's 
Magazine,  (New-Haven)  vol.  ii.  p.  229. 


161 

no  church  could  he  formed  hut  hy  a  license  from  the 
magistrate."*  This  law  does  not  appear  to  have  proved 
eflfectual,  for  we  have  the  following  substance  of  a  law 
which  was  published  at  Boston  in  1649,  given  us  by 
Shaw.f  "  Respecting  »  heresie  error^  it  is  ordered, 
that  if  any  Christian  within  this  juristliction  shall  go 
about  to  subvert,  and  destroy,  the  Christian  faith  and  re- 
ligion, by  broaching  any  damnable  heresies,  as  denying 
the  immortality  of  the  soul,  or  resurrection  of  the  body ; 
or  any  sin  to  be  repented  of  in  the  regenerate  ;  or  any 
evil  done  by  the  outward  man  to  be  accounted  sin  ;  or 
denying  that  Christ  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  our  sins  ; 
or  shall  afiBrm  that  we  are  not  justified  by  his  death  and 
righteousness,  but  by  the  perfection  of  our  own  works  ; 
or  shall  deny  the  morality  of  the  fourth  commandment; 
or  shall  openly  oppose,  or  condemn,  the  baptism  of  in- 
fants, or  shall  purposely  depart  the  congregation  at  the 
administration  of  tliat  ordinance,  or  shall  deny  the  or- 
dinance of  magistracy,  or  their  lawful  authority  to  maka 
war,  or  to  punish  the  outward  breaches  of  the  frst  table^ 
or  shall  endeavour  to  seduce  others  to  any  of  the  errors 
or  heresies  abovementioned  ;  every  such  person,  con- 
tinuing obstinate  therein,  after  due  means  of  conviction, 
shall  be  sentenced  to  banishment.''  ^^  Any  one  deny- 
ing the  Scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God,  for  the  first 
offence  to  be  fined  fifty  pounds  and  severely  whipped  ; 
for  the  second  offence,  banishment  or  death  as  the 
Court  should  adjudge." 

The  following  extract  is  given  by  Shaw  as  illustra- 
tive of  the  opinions  and  style   of  the  writers  of  those 

*  Quoted  in  Shaw's  Description  of  Boston,  p.  134. 
t  Description  of  Boston,  p.  136. 
21 


162 

times  on  "=  toleration  in  religious  matters."  "  One  of 
the  four  things  my  heart  hath  naturally  detested  is  tol- 
erations of  divers  religions,  or  of  one  religion  in  segre- 
gant  shapes.  To  authorise  an  untruth  by  toleration  of 
the  state,  is  to  build  a  sconce  against  the  walls  of  Hea- 
ven to  batter  God  out  of  his  chair. — That  state  that  will 
give  LIBERTY  OF  coxsciENCE  iu  matters  of  religion,  must 
give  liberty  of  conscience  and  conversation  in  their 
moral  laws  ;  or  else  the  fiddle  will  be  out  of  tune,  and 
some  of  the  strings  will  crack." 

In  1640,  a  few  Episcopalians,  who  bad  settled  what 
is  now  Portsmouth  in  New-Hampshire,  made  a  grant 
of  fifty  acres  of  land,  upon  which  they  erected  a  par- 
sonage house  and  chapel.  The  Rev.  Richard  Gibson, 
who  had  been  chaplain  to  a  fishing  establishment,  was 
called  to  be  their  "  first  parson."  ''  He  was  wholly  ad- 
dicted," to  use  the  courteous  language  of  Dr.  Belknap, 
"  to  the  hierarchy  and  discipline  of  Kngland  ;  and  ex- 
ercised his  ministerial  functiua  according  to  the  ritual." 
But  as  this  place  was  then  under  the  government  of  Mas- 
sachusetts, such  schismatical  proceedings  were  not  to  be 
suffered  ; — it  was  building  a  sconce  to  batter  God  out  of 
his  chair.  He  was  accusedof  scandalizingthegovernment 
at  Boston  and  denying  its  title.  Summoned  before  it, 
he  made  his  submission,  and  being  about  to  depart  the 
country,  was  discharged  without  fine  or  punishment. 
He  probably  had  dropped  some  indiscreet  remark  re- 
specting the  prevalent  opinions,  or  the  right  of  Massa- 
chusetts to  govern  New-Hampshire,  which  furnished 
an  opportunity,  in  his  fear  of  the  consequences,  to  get 
rid  of  him  effectually.  But  this  is  not  all.  The  Puri- 
tans obtained  possession  of  the  glebe,  called  the  chapel 


163 

a  meeting  houses  and  notwithstanding  the  congregatioi;i 
>vhich  made  use  of  it  has  been  subsequently  divided, 
yet,  for  no  other  apparent  purpose  than  to  retain  this 
property,  they  continue  to  choose  church  wardens,  an 
oflRcer  otherwise  unknown  in  their  system.* 

The  members  of  the  first  Baptist  congrei^ation  in 
Boston  were  originally  gathered  at  Charlesto  wn,  but  they 
afterwards  met  for  some  years  on  an  island  in  the  har- 
bour of  Boston.  "  Some  of  them  had  been  imprisoned 
and  hanislied  ;  and  they  were  not  allowed  to  meet 
openly  in  town  till  1672.  In  1678,  they  built  a  house 
for  worship,  out  of  which  tliey  were  soon  shut,  and  for 
some  time  encountered  severe  opposition.  The  Gener- 
al Court  declared  that  the  house  was  built  without  legal 
permission,  and  therefore  forfeited  to  the  county,  &c. 
The  act  however  was  not  enforced.! 

In  1679,  in  consequence  of  the  opposition  of  the  local 
government,  some  respectable  inhabitants  of  Boston, 
who  were  desirous  of  adopting  the  Episcopal  ministry 
and  worship,  were  obliged  to  petition  the  King  for  ^;?'o- 
tection,  whicli  being  granted,  they  soon  after  obtained  a 
minister,  and  built  a  church  ;  not,  as  may  easily  be  sup- 
posed, without  many  hindrances.:!: 

We  might  go  on  to  detail  accounts  of  this  nature  to  a 
very  indefinite  length  ;— we  might  tell  of  the  banish- 
ment of  Roger  Williams  into  the  wilderness,  and  of  the 
gentle  hint  given  him  by  the  Governor,  that  he  had  not 

*  Alden'saccount  of  the  Religious  Societies  in  Portsmouth,  p,  5, 
and  note  A.  The  original  "  ciuirch  wa|:dens  and  their  successors" 
were  made  "  feoffees  in  trust." 

t  Description  of  Boston,  p.  242. 

\  Churchman  Is  Magazine,  (New-Haven,)  vol.  ii.  p.  137 


164 

gone  quite  far  enough,  because  lie  was  yet  within  an 
imaginary  line  ;* — of  Quakers  scourged  at  the  cart  tail. 
or  deprived  of  their  lives  at  the  gallows, ■[  &c.  &c.  But 
enough  has  been  said  to  show^  that  the  instances  of  per- 
secution on  the  part  of  the  Puritans,  are  neither  rare, 
nor  trivial  in  their  character.  These  acts,  let  it  be  re- 
membered, were  performed  by  men  who  "  fled  from 
tyrannizing  Bishops,'' — by  men  who  '^^  for  the  sake  of 
rendering  a  spontaneous  obedience,  and  breathing  an 
unfettered  prayer,  were  willing  to  sit  at  their  board 
with  famine,  and  lay  themselves  to  rest  on  rocks.** 
We  are  willing  to  rest  the  whole  on  the  testimony  of 
Dr.  Belknap.  ^^  They  maintained  that  all  men  had 
liberty  to  do  right,  but  no  liberty  to  do  wrong ;  and  it  is 
too  evident  from  their  conduct,  that  they  supposed  the 
power  of  judging  to  be  in  those  who  were  vested  with 
authority, — a  princijde  big  with  all  the  horrors  of  jjer- 
secution.  The  exercise  of  such  authority  they  con- 
demned in  the  liigh  Church  party,  who  had  oppressed 
them  in  England,  and  yet,  such  is  the  frailty  of  human 
nature,  they  held  the  same  niiNCiPLES,  and  prac- 

*  "  Roger  Williams,"  says  Trumbull,  (Hist.  U.  S.  vol.  i.  p.  105) 
"  was  a  gentleman  of  benevolence,  and  those  who  repaired  to  him 
[after  his  banishment]  were  sure  of  meeting  with  the  kindest 
treatment.  Whatever  may  have  been  his  errors,  he  leas  in  one 
point  more  illuminated  than  his  brethren  ;  that  to  punish  a  man  for 
any  matters  of  conscience  is  persecution.  While  the  Massachusetts, 
therefore,  were  excommunicating  and  banishing  people  for  their 
religious  sentiments,  here  they  found  a  welcome  retreat." 

t  If  Cotton  and  Norton,  who  are  said  to  have  led  and  participat- 
ed in  these  persecutions,  could  be  characterized  as  we  have  more 
than  once  known  them  to  be,  as  "  eminent  and  holy  divines,"  we 
think,  that  charity  itself  would  not  find  it  difficult  to  speak  of  Arch- 
bishop Laud,  in  a  style  to  the  full  as  courteous.  See  note,  page  155. 


165 

TISED  THE  SAME  OPPRESSIONS,  ON  THOSE  WHO  DISSENT- 
ED   FROM  THEM.'^* 

Perliaps  oar  readers  are  now  prepared  to  admit,  that 
we,  in  our  turn,  have  some  ground  to  rail  at  establish- 
ments ;  for  certainly,  tlie  instances  we  have  adduced, 
abundantly  prove,  that  Massachusetts,  in  her  early  day, 
allowed  a  union  between  ciiurch  and  state,  equally  as 
dangerous,  as  arbitrary,  and  oj>pressive,  as  that  of  her 
mother  country.  We  too  might  clamour  concerning 
^'  the  selfishness,  the  chicanery  and  violence,"  exhibited 
in  its  history.  We  inight  dilate  upon  that  "  wanton 
severiiy,"  which  exiled  men  more  illuminated  than 
themselves  into  a  savage  wilderness,  and  "  beyond  the 
reach  of  those  who  would  have  stood  between  them  and 
starvation."  We  too  could  make  outcries  against  a  sect, 
'^  whose  history  is  that  of  unrelenting  strictness  when 
in  po\^er,  and  of  abject  artifice  and  false  professions 
w  hen  in  disgrace."  We  too  might  tell  how  "  through 
some  changes  of  fortune,  and  with  the  loss  of  the  power 
of  persecuting,  wrested  from  it  by  tlie  growth  of  better 
principles  in  politics,  it  has  continued,  '•  with  here  and 
there  an  exception,  to  breathe  the  same  haughty,  ex- 
clusive," and  intolerant  "^  spirit."  But  shall  we  do 
this  ?  Charity  forbid.  We  pity  the  infirmities  and  the 
errors  of  the  fathers  of  New-Eiigland,  for  they  were 
our  fathers  too.  We  lament  for  the  spots  which  stain 
their  otherwise  fair  escutcheon,  and  we  would  have  al- 
lowed the  knowledge  of  them  to  have  slept  with  tliem 
in  the  tomb.  They  had  many  virtues,  upon  the  bright- 
ness of  which  we  could  dwell  with  pleasure.  It  is 
true,  they  did  little,  or  notiiing,  towards  achciving  reli- 

*Life  of  Winthrop.  p.  3Ff'K  qiiotod  }»y  Sliciw. 


166 

gioiis  liberty  in  the  true  sense  of  the  term  ;  yet  if  tJieij 
(lid  not  understand  the  principle  of  toleration,  witli 
which  later  times  have  made  us  fully  acquainted,  it  was 
the  error,  too,  of  the  sincere  and  pious  Charles  I.  of  Ba- 
con, of  Clarendon,  and,  we  suppose  we  may  he  permit- 
ted to  say,  of  Laud.  The  truth  is,  that  with  regard  to 
the  times  of  which  we  have  heen  speaking,  the  true 
principles  of  toleration  seem  to  have  been  utterly  un- 
known. Those  who  held  each  different  class  of  reli- 
gious priuciples,  strove  earnestly  for  the  predominance 
over  all  others  ;  each  believing  that  their  system  alone 
formed  the  acceptable  religion  ;  each  rejecting  toleration 
as  soul  poison.  Instead,  then,  of  prolonging  the  spirit 
and  temper  of  those  calamitous  times,  we  ought  rather 
gratefully  to  thank  God,  that  he  has  suffered  us  to  have 
our  existence  in  a  time,  when  the  search  for  the  know- 
ledge of  religion  is  as  free  as  any  enlightened  mind  can 
desire. 

But  not  so  must  we  part  with  the  Reviewer.  His 
spirit  belongs  to  the  times  long  since  gone  by.  His  Re- 
view exhibits  the  grossest  intolerance,  and  the  most  ar- 
rogant, presumption  on  almost  every  page.  With  the 
relief  formed  by  his  chisel,  we  see  his^He?i^,  and  fellow 
champion,  striding  forth  as  a  giant  in  talents  and  learn- 
ing, while  the  writer,  whom  he  chose  to  attack,  sinks 
back  into  the  shade  of  sympathy,  and  is  unworthy  of 
his  titles  !  Who  are  "  the  best  of  the  early  reformers ;" 
— who  "  the  most  judicious  writers  of  later  times,"  but 
those  whose  opinions  he  thinks  he  can  warp  to  coun- 
tenance his  theory  ?  Who  are  ^»  the  best  scholars^ 
preachers,  and  (even)  men  in  the  nation'^  of  England  i 


167 


—who  ii  the  best  boast  of  the  protcstant  name,''  but 
those  whose  case  happened  to  suit  liis  purpose,  and  en- 
abled him  to  brin-  forth  a  well  turned  period  ?  "  That 
was  excellently  observed,  say  I,  where  I  read  a  passage 
•11  an  author  whose  opinion  agrees  with  mine  When 
we  differ,  there  I  pronounce  him  mistaken/'  And  this 
as  was  said  in  another  case,  "  is  undoubtedly  the  philoso- 
phy of  the  matter." 

With  the  spirit  of  such   writers,  we  trust,  we  have 
not  much   in  common.     Claiming  to  ourselves,   in  this 
happy  country,  the  hallowed  right  of  a  conscientious 
and  undisturbed  enjoyment  of  those  principles   which 
wei-e  the  delight  of  our  youth,  and  are  the  settled  con- 
viction  of  our  soberer  manhood  ;  we  cheerfully  yield  to 
others  a  similar  right  ;  against  which,  God  forbid,  that 
we  should  wish  to  infringe  !     Attacked  in  so  boasting 
and  pompous   a  style,   by  a  writer  possessed  of  such 
overweening   self-confidence,  we  have   thought  it  our 
duty  to  say  something  in  self-defence  :   because  it  may 
tend  to  relieve  our  characters   from  the  imputation  of 
believing  in  an  indefensible  system.     Perhaps  this  was 
unnecessary  ;  for  we  see,  and  we  rejoice  that  we  do  see, 
the  Church  which  the  Reformers  consecrated  by  their 
BLOOD,— which  has  nourished  within  her  bosom  talents 
of  as  mighty  power  and  as  noble  cast  as  any  the  world 
has  seen,— and  which  has  kindled  the  devotion,  and  re- 
ceived the  vows,  of  holy  and  pious  men  for  ages,— is 
now  spreading  to  a  glorious  extent  through    our  own 
country;  while  our  brethren  of  Europe,   are  carryin- 
forth  the  standard  of  the  ckoss,  to  supplant,  we  fru^L 
the  idols  of  heathenism. 


I 


168 


In  laying  down  our  pen,  we  feel  constrained  to  take 
our  farewell  of  the  Reviewer,  in  what  was  once  said  of 
Gibbon's  History  :  "  The  author  often  makes,  when  he 
cannot  readily  find,  occasion  to  insult  our  religion  : 
which  he  hates  so  cordially,  that  he  might  seem  to  re^ 
vengc  some  personal  injury." 


Vindicaiion  of  the  Episcopal  Church — Erratii. 


The  circumstance  of  the  Author^s  not  resulln^Mn  the  vicinitv  of 
the  press,  will,  it  is  hoped,  be  considered  as  an  apology  for  "^th*- 
number  and  the  magnitude  of  t!io  followino- 

ERRATA. 

Page    6  Lines  18  and  22  omit  the  inverted  commas. 
8  3  omit  from. 

11   Line   19  for     disagreeable       read     disagreeahhj. 

21  22  for     strong  read     stron<rhj 

.'  wu^'^  f"?  l^  *^^  quotation  from  Chilhngworth  should  read  thus 

When  I  shall  see  all  the  democracies  and  aristocracies  in  the 
world  he  down  and  sleep,  and  awake  into  monarchies,  then  will  1 
begm  to  believe  that  presbyterian  government  (and  we  suppose 
we  may  be  permitted  to  say-or  congregationaO  having  continued 
in  the  Church  durmg  the  apostles'  times,  should  presently  after 
agamst  the  apostles'  doctrines  and  the  zs ill  of  Christ,  be  vvhirled 
about  hke  a  scene  in  a  masque,  and  transformed  into  Episconacv  " 
Page  37  Line   5  for  readier'*  read      readers' 

41   last  line  before  moderation     insert    great. 

43  Line     2  for     dominion  read      domination. 

47  7  for     pretensions        read      pretension. 

56  19  for     execute  read     exercise. 

75  22  for     the  sentence     read     a  sentence. 

"  24  for     so   at  read     so  that  at. 

78  23  tor     sectarians  read     sectaries. 

86  12  for     a*  generally     read     so  generally 

r    7,^,?       .u  ?\  after  rAannsert    ^^  our  Churches  are  delivered  out 
of  all  ;     so  that  the  sentence  will  read  thus  :  "  We  ought   g-reatly 
to  rejoice,  and  give   God  thanks,  that  our  Churches  are  deliverefi 
out  ot  all  those  things  which  displeased  God  so  sore,  &c 
Page  122  last  line  for      they  read     he. 

129  18  for     ^/m«  other  text  read     <Ae  other  text. 

144  19  for     /iM  poor  read     ^/m<  poor. 

148  14  for      University         read      Universities. 

155  10  for    published  read     preached, 

1&9  IQ  omit  inverted  commas  after  «o. 


I 


■ 


I  i  i 


4 


1  , 


^  1   '     ' 


